Goa High Court Quashes FIR Against Pastor in Conversion Case, Cites Lack of Evidence and "Abuse of Process"

Panaji, Goa – In a significant judgment underscoring the judiciary's role as a bulwark against unsubstantiated criminal proceedings, the Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court has quashed a three-year-old First Information Report (FIR) against Pastor Dominic D'Souza and his wife, Joan D'Souza. The court found that the continuation of the case, which accused the couple of coercing religious conversions through financial allurements and fraudulent promises, would constitute an "abuse of process" due to a complete lack of evidence.

The ruling, delivered by a bench comprising Justice Nivedita Mehta and Justice Bharat Deshpande on September 23, brings to a close the 2022 case registered at the Mapusa Police Station (FIR No. 126/2022). The decision is a critical development in the ongoing legal battles faced by the pastor and arrives amidst a heated political debate in Goa over the proposed enactment of a stringent anti-conversion law.

The Allegations and the Investigation's Outcome

The case originated in May 2022 following complaints that Pastor Dominic and Joan D'Souza, founders of the Siolim-based Five Pillars Church, were inducing vulnerable individuals to convert to Christianity. The allegations invoked serious charges under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Section 153A (promoting enmity between religious groups), Section 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings), and Section 420 (cheating).

However, after more than three years of investigation, the prosecution's case unraveled in court. The Goa government’s Additional Public Prosecutor conceded before the High Court that the probe had yielded "no evidence" to substantiate the claims. The Mapusa Police had previously filed an 'A' summary report, a formal closure recommendation indicating that the allegations were unsubstantiated due to insufficient proof. Despite this, a chargesheet was never formally filed, leaving the case lingering and the accused in a state of legal uncertainty.

Invoking their inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the justices concluded that allowing the proceedings to continue would serve no legal purpose and would amount to harassment. The court's decision to quash the FIR effectively dismisses the case with costs.

Legal Ramifications and the Path to Compensation

Advocate Manuel D'Souza, counsel for the couple, hailed the verdict as a decisive victory against a "bogus and false case." Speaking to the media, he highlighted the state's admission as the cornerstone of their petition. "The Goa government’s Additional Public Prosecutor confirmed during the case hearing that there is no evidence to support the case," he stated. "It was a false case, and therefore, there was no legal ground to justify ongoing proceedings."

The legal team now plans to leverage this judgment to pursue a claim for malicious prosecution. "Now that the FIR has been quashed, we can submit the High Court judgement copy to the Mapusa JMFC and the Sessions Court to support our claim for compensation," Advocate D'Souza explained. "The quashing of the FIR itself establishes that the allegations were false and serves as a strong foundation for our compensation claim."

This move signals a potential shift from a defensive legal posture to an offensive one, seeking accountability for what they argue was a targeted and unfounded prosecution that caused significant personal and reputational damage.

A Pattern of Scrutiny and Constitutional Questions

The 2022 FIR was not an isolated incident for Pastor Dominic D'Souza. It was the eighth such complaint filed against him, reflecting a persistent pattern of scrutiny faced by the Christian cleric in the BJP-governed state. This scrutiny has manifested in both police action and administrative orders.

In December 2022, the North Goa District Collector issued an order under Section 144 of the CrPC, banning all religious activities at the Five Pillars Church, explicitly citing allegations of "illegal conversions through allurement or fraud." This executive order was successfully challenged and subsequently quashed by the same High Court bench in May 2024. In that ruling, the court held the ban to be a "direct infringement of fundamental rights" guaranteed under Articles 25 (freedom to profess, practice, and propagate religion) and 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs) of the Indian Constitution.

Despite these legal victories, the pastor's troubles continue. He was arrested in a separate case in January 2024, accused of practicing "black magic" and criminal intimidation under IPC Sections 506 and 34. That matter remains pending before the High Court.

Broader Context: Goa's Anti-Conversion Law Debate

The D'Souza cases are emblematic of a larger socio-political churn in Goa concerning religious freedom and conversion. While the state has a dormant 1968 "Freedom of Religion Act" from the Portuguese era, Chief Minister Pramod Sawant's administration has been vocal about introducing a more stringent anti-conversion law, mirroring legislation in states like Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.

In July 2025, the government proposed a bill with severe penalties, including up to seven years' imprisonment for mass conversions and life imprisonment for conversions involving force or "love jihad." The proposal has been met with staunch opposition from civil society and political parties like Congress and AAP, who argue it is a "divisive" measure designed to target minority communities.

Critics, including the United Christian Forum (UCF) and international bodies like the USCIRF, contend that such laws are often weaponized. A 2025 UCF report noted a 40% rise in incidents targeting clergy in Goa, often stemming from complaints by fringe groups. Legal data from other states with similar laws suggests a high acquittal rate, indicating that many cases fail to meet the evidentiary standards in court.

The High Court's decisive quashing of the FIR against Pastor D'Souza serves as a powerful judicial counterpoint in this debate. It highlights the critical need for credible evidence to sustain criminal charges and reaffirms that allegations, no matter how politically charged, must withstand legal scrutiny. As Goa's legislative assembly prepares to debate the proposed bill, this judgment will undoubtedly feature prominently in arguments about protecting fundamental rights and preventing the misuse of law for malicious purposes.