'Father', 'Maulana' Or 'Karmkandi' Who Converts Anyone By Force Would Be Liable Under UP Anti Conversion Law: Allahabad HC

A bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal observed this while denying bail to a 'Maulana' (Religious Priest) who has been accused of forcibly converting a victim to 'Islam' and performing her Nikaah with a Muslim man.

The Court took into account the statement of the victim-girl/Informant recorded under Section 164 CrPC wherein she had categorically submitted that she was forced to accept 'Islam' and Nikaah was performed.

The Court said that the applicant-accused (Mohd Shane Alam), being the 'Religion Convertor' as defined under Section 2(i) of the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, would be liable under the 2021 Act.

“In the instant case, the applicant, who comes under the definition of "Religion Convertor", as defined in Section 2(i) of Act, 2021, had got the Nikaah ceremony of the Informant performed with accused Amaan. The necessary declaration has to be obtained before conversion, given in Section 8 of Act, 2021 was not obtained from the District Magistrate, as mandated under the Act, 2021. Defiance of the provision of the Act, 2021 is punishable under Section 5 of Act, 2021,” the Court remarked.

Our readers may note that Section 3 of the 2021 Act prohibits conversion from one religion to another by misrepresentation, force, fraud, undue influence, coercion and allurement.

Before the Court, the counsel for the accused-applicant, booked under Section 3/5(1) of the 2021 Act, contended that he had only performed Nikah of the Informant in March 2024 with the accused and had not forcibly converted her to 'Islam'.

On the other hand, AGA, appearing for the state, while opposing the bail application, submitted that the victim had deposed under Section 164 CrPC that she was forced to accept 'Islam' and Nikaah was performed in March 2024, which was done by the 'Religion Converter', the applicant.

Against the backdrop of these submissions, the Court observed that while the Constitution of India confers on each individual the fundamental right to profess, practice and propagate his religion, there have been many cases of religious conversion.

“The Constitution of India guarantees the religious freedom to all persons which reflects the social harmony and spirit of 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 persons are free to preach, practice and propagate any religion of their choice. Constitution confers on each individual the fundamental right to profess, practice and propagate his religion. 7. However, in the recent past many such examples came to light where gullible persons have been converted from one religion to another by misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion, allurement or by fraudulent means.”

The Court further noted that a 'religion converter' could be anyone who, by force, misrepresentation, undue influence, etc., converts any other person from one religion to another, and it wouldn't matter what his designation is.

In view of this, considering the statement of the victim under section 164 CrPC, the Court concluded that the applicant-accused would come under the definition of a 'Religion Converter' and, thus, would be liable under the 2021 Act. Therefore, his bail plea was rejected.

Appearances

Counsel for Applicant: Nand Kishor Mishra

Counsel for Opposite Party: GA

Case title – Mohd Shane Alam vs. State Of U.P. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 526

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 526

Click Here To Read/Download Order