The Allahabad High Court held that distributing the Bible or preaching religion does not constitute an offence under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The Court criticised the police for registering an FIR solely on the basis of a prayer meeting conducted at a residence where Bibles were distributed and religious teachings were shared. It observed that the FIR did not show the presence of any individual claiming to have been converted, nor did it indicate that any person had complained at the time of registration that they were subjected to force, fraud, undue influence, or allurement. The FIR only mentioned the recovery of Bibles and an LED screen being used during the prayer gathering.
The bench stated that treating the act of distributing religious literature or holding a prayer meeting as equivalent to unlawful conversion reflected an excessive and unwarranted approach by the authorities. It clarified that the statute mandates the presence of an identifiable victim who asserts that a conversion has taken place through prohibited means. In the absence of such an allegation, the mere act of engaging in religious preaching or sharing holy texts cannot attract liability under the law.
The FIR had been lodged by a person who alleged that the accused held a gathering and distributed Bibles to poor and Dalit villagers with the intention of converting them. However, no person had initially come forward claiming to have been coerced. Only at a later stage did one individual make a statement asserting that he was offered allurement. The Court noted that this statement was recorded only after the accused had already been subjected to police action and emphasised that such delayed claims raise serious concerns regarding the credibility of the prosecution narrative.
The Court also questioned the role of the complainant, issuing notices seeking explanation on how he entered the accused’s residence, under what authority he brought a crowd, and how he came to know of the alleged incident. It sought clarity on the legal basis for the complainant’s actions and whether offences relating to trespass or intimidation might instead arise from his conduct. These queries underscored the Court’s unease with the manner in which the case had been initiated and pursued.
In its observations, the Court reiterated that the 2021 Act is a special legislation requiring strict compliance. It emphasised that offences under the Act must be supported by concrete allegations and credible proof of coercion, fraud, or inducement. Without such evidence, the law cannot be invoked merely because individuals choose to practise or share their faith. The Court stated that criminalising peaceful religious activity undermines constitutional freedoms and is incompatible with the statutory requirements.
The matter was directed to be listed after four weeks for further proceedings. Through its order, the High Court delivered a strong message against unwarranted criminalisation of religious practices and stressed that the law cannot be misused to target individuals engaging in legitimate expressions of belief.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.