UP 'Anti-Conversion' Law | Distributing Bible, Organising Bhandara Doesn’t Amount To ‘Allurement’ For Religious Conversion: Allahabad HC

The bench of Justice Shamim Ahmad also explained the scope of Section 4 of the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act 2021 [person competent to lodge FIR] as to who can lodge an FIR regarding the commission of an offence under Section 3 of the Act.

The Court explained that as per the mandate of the said provision, only a person who has been converted, his/ her parents, brother, sister, or any other person who is related to him/ her by blood, marriage, or adoption may lodge a first information report pertaining to the allegation of such conversion and no one else.

The Court made these observations while granting bail to two persons, Christians by religion (Jose Papachen And Sheeja), who have been accused of being instrumental in the conversion of religion (from Hinduism to Christianity) by various allurement amongst the communities of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe.

They were booked under Sections 3 and 5 (1) of the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act and Section 3(1) (dha) of the SC/ST Act and arrested earlier this year on the basis of a complaint filed by a BJP functionary in Ambedkar Nagar district.

Earlier, their bail application was rejected by the Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Ambedkar Nagar in March this year, following which, they moved the HC.

Taking into account the allegations against the accused persons and the arguments advanced by both parties, the Court observed that there was no material to show that the appellants had used any undue influence or allurement to the said villagers for mass conversion.

The Court noted that instead appellants were involved in providing good teachings to children and promoting the spirit of brotherhood amongst the villagers and hence, there doesn't appear to be the existence of any material which would suggest conversion by use of force.

"...the complainant has no locus to lodge the present F.I.R. as provided under Section 4 of the Act, 2021 and there also appears force in the argument of learned counsel for the appellants that providing good teachings, distributing Holy Bible books, encouraging children to get education, organizing assembly of villagers and performing “Bhandara” and instructing the villagers not to enter into altercation and also not to take liquor do not amount to allurement," the Court observed as it noted that the complainant in the case was not the competent person to lodge an FIR u/s 4 of the 2021 Act.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed and the accused were directed to be released on bail.

Appearances

Counsel for Appellant: Vishva Nath Pratap Singh

Counsel for Respondent: G.A.

Case title - Jose Papachen And Another vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Another [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 877 of 2023]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 310

Click Here To Read/Download Order