JUDGMENT :

1. The present application is filed for seeking following main reliefs:

“A. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to admit and allow this petition.

B. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside FIR being 11215020200024 registered with Petlad Rural Police Station, Dist. Anand for offence punishable under sections 3 and 4 of The Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003.

C. Pending admission and final disposal of the present petition, be pleased to stay further investigation in respect of FIR being 11215020200024 registered with Petlad Rural Police Station, Dist. Anand for offence punishable under sections 3 and 4 of The Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003.”

2.1 Brief facts as per the case of the applicant in this application are as such that complainant is activist of forum for peace and justice. It is further the case of the applicant in this application that in the year 2013, he came to know that one - Sudhaben Makwana mother of minor Joyal Mithilesh Chourasiya had performed conversion of her son - Joyal at Amod church by the then parish priest of the church without prior permission of the District Magistrate. It is further the case of the applicant in this application that father of the minor son- Mithilesh Chorasiya had also represented in this regard. On scrutiny it found that the mother and father of minor Joyal were in love with each other resultantly they got married and registered their marriage on 17.07.2001. It is further the case of the applicant in this application that Sudhaben was frequently visiting church at Amod, in the certificate of Joyal Mithilesh Chorasiya issued by R.C. Mission School, Mariampura. It is mentioned the caste as Hindu Panvadiya there. It is further the case of the applicant in this application that the marriage of mother and father was performed by Hindu rituals. It is further the case of the applicant in this application that father of Joyal is of Hindu Vaishya community. In the leaving certificate of the mother of Joyal the caste is mentioned as Hindu-Vankar. It is further the case of the applicant in this application that the mother and father of Joyal had got divorce by divorce agreement on 28.03.2008 and there also it mentioned that the religion is Hindu.

2.2 It is further the case of the complainant in this application that on 08.04.2012 the then Parish Priest of Village Amod had converted Joyal from Hindu Religion to Christian religion without obtaining prior permission of the competent officer. Therefore, the complainant had made an application to the District Collector in this regard and the Collector had issued directions to act in accordance with law.

2.3 Hence, this application is preferred.

3. Heard learned senior advocate Mr. Percy Kavina assisted by Mr. Johnsey P. Macwan for the applicant, HL Patel Advocates for the respondent No.2 and Mr. Dhawan Jayswal, learned APP for the respondent No.1 – State.

4.1 Learned senior advocate Mr. Percy Kavina has submitted that the present complaint has been filed at the behest of a third party, which is not maintainable in the eyes of the law. Furthermore, it is submitted that the complaint was filed much after the alleged offense was committed. He has drawn my attention towards the contents of the F.I.R., wherein it is stated that the alleged offense was committed on 8.4.2012, and the information was given to the Police Station on 22.1.2020 by one Dharmendrakumar Natwarsinh Rathod, who has no connection with the alleged offense. The complaint is registered under the provisions of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003.

4.2 He has further submitted that, considering the tenor of the complaint, no offense is made out against the present applicant, as the complaint is not filed by the near blood relatives as required under Section 3 of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003. He has also drawn my attention to the fact that the complaint is filed against the present applicant, who happens to be the parish priest of the church. It