SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(All) 1041

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.
Shriniwas Rav Nayak – Applicant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Opposite Party
Criminal misc. Bail application No. - 11804 of 2024
Decided On : 09-07-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant : Patsy David, Sanju Lata, Saurabh Pandey
For the Opposite Party : G.A.

IMPORTANT POINT
The Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 prohibits conversion from one religion to another through unlawful means, and the court emphasized that the right to religious freedom does not permit coercive or fraudulent conversions.

Headnote:

BAIL - UNLAWFUL RELIGION CONVERSION - Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 - Sections 2, 3, 4, 5 - The court discussed the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, particularly Sections 2 defining key terms such as 'Allurement', 'Coercion', and 'Conversion', and Section 3 which prohibits conversion through misrepresentation, force, or undue influence. The court emphasized the constitutional right to religious freedom while clarifying that this does not extend to unlawful conversions. The interpretations of these sections influenced the court's decision to deny bail, as the applicant was found to be involved in a conversion program that violated the Act.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant sought bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for involvement in a case under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, where he was accused of participating in a mass conversion event aimed at converting individuals from Hinduism to Christianity.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was sufficient prima facie evidence indicating that the applicant was involved in unlawful religious conversion activities, as reported by the informant and corroborated by witness statements.

Issues: Whether the applicant was involved in unlawful conversion activities as defined under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, and whether he should be granted bail during the trial.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the definitions and prohibitions outlined in the Act clearly establish that any act of conversion through misrepresentation, coercion, or undue influence is unlawful. The presence of multiple witnesses and the nature of the allegations were sufficient to deny bail.

Final Decision: The bail application was rejected based on the prima facie case established against the applicant under the Act.

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.

1. Heard Ms. Sanju Lata, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 78 of 2024, under Sections 3/5 (1) of Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act of 2021’), Police Station-Nichlaul, District-Maharajganj seeks enlargement on bail, during the pendency of trial.

3. The prosecution story as unfolded in the First Information Report is that on 15.02.2024, the informant was invited to the house of co-accused, Vishwanath. When he reached there he saw that many people of village were there, most of them belonging to Scheduled Castes community. Along with the co-accused, Vishwanath, his brother, Brijlal, the applicant and one Ravindra were present. He was asked to leave Hindu religion and accept Christianity. He was told that once he accepts Christianity, all his pain would come to an end and he would progress in life. Some of the villagers on the assurance had accepted Christianity and started praying. The informant after making an excuse ran away and informed the Police.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has no connection with the alleged conversion and is a domestic help of one of the co-accused and is resident of Andhra Pradesh and has been falsely roped in in the instant case. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the FIR does not disclose any religion convertor as defined under Section 2(I)(i) of the Act of 2021. Further, statement of witnesses as alleged by the Police cannot be accepted as no undue influence was put for converting. Moreover, no person who has accepted Christianity has come forward to make any complaint.

5. Learned A.G.A. while opposing the bail application has submitted that mass conversion was going on, and the informant who was asked to accept Christianity had refused and had informed the Police in writing upon which the applicant was arrested. According to him, case under Section 3/5 of the Act of 2021 is made out against the applicant who is a resident of Andhra Pradesh and had come to the place in question at Maharajganj where the conversion was taking place and was actively participating in the conversion from one religion to another which is against the law.

6. I have heard respective counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

7. The Uttar Pradesh Act No. 3 of 2021 came into force on 4th March, 2021 after receiving assent of the Governor. It was published in the Government Gazette on 5th March, 2021. The statement of object and reason for enforcing the Act was to provide for prohibition of unlawful conversion from one religion to another by misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion, allurement or by any fraudulent means or by marriage and for the matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

8. The Constitution of India guarantees religious freedom to all persons which reflects the social harmony and spirit of India. The objective of this right is to sustain the spirit of secularism in India. According to the Constitution, State has no religion and all religions are equal before the State, and no religion shall be given preference over the other. All the persons are free to preach, practice and propagate any religion of their choice.

9. The Constitution confers on each individual the fundamental right to profess, practice and propagate his religion. However, the individual right to freedom of conscience and religion cannot be extended to construe a collective right to proselytize; the right to religious freedom belongs equally to the person converting and the individual sought to be converted.

10. Section 2(a) of the Act of 2021 defines “Allurement”, Section 2(b) defines “Coercion”, Section 2(c) defines “Conversion”, Section 2(e) defines “Fraudulent means”, Section 2(f) defines “Mass Convers

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top