Gujarat High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Female Health Worker Accused Of Forcing ASHA Workers To Convert To Christianity
The Gujarat High Court refused to quash an FIR against a female health worker accused of attempting to convert Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) workers to Christianity, noting that the allegations prima facie disclosed commission of the offence. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 217]
The applicant had sought quashing of an FIR and chargesheet under Sections 4(1), 4(2) and 4C of Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act.
Referring to the allegations, Justice MK Thakker in her order said:
"...if one would peruse the material of investigation which suggest that the applicant targeted economically weaker persons, took advantage of their financial circumstances, propagated Christianity by criticizing idol worship in the Hindu religion by closing doors of rooms, and highlighted the perceived benefits of conversion through the experiences narrated by persons present at the Vadodara programme, prima facie disclose the commission of cognizable offences under the provisions of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003. At this stage, this Court is only required to examine whether the allegations and the material collected during the investigation disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and not whether the prosecution will ultimately succeed at the trial".
The court also rejected the petitioner's contention that the complaint was not lodged by the alleged victims of forced conversion, noting that Supreme Court in Durga Yadav vs. State of U.P. and others had held that “any person” aggrieved by an unlawful conversion, in violation of Article 25 of the Constitution of India, is entitled to lodge a complaint before the police for registration of an FIR so as to achieve the object and purpose of the Act.
The court noted that as per the allegations in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation pointed to the applicant distributing copies of the Holy Bible to the complainant and the other victims, asking them to stay back after the meetings, showing them YouTube videos relating to Christianity behind closed doors, and inviting them to attend a Christian religious programme at Vadodara under the pretext of a Primary Health Centre meeting.
This, the court said, "prima facie" suggest the involvement of the applicant in the commission of the alleged offences.
The court also noted that the District Magistrate, Anand had accorded sanction under Section 6 of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act for filing the charge-sheet against the applicant. It thus rejected the contention of the applicant that the prosecution is vitiated for want of the previous sanction mandated under Section 6.
"It is further contended that, though all the victims attended the programme at Vadodara and also partook of the meal served there, the allegation is that they were called to Vadodara under the pretext of attending a meeting of the Primary Health Centre. Therefore, merely because they attended the programme and accepted the meal would not, by itself, lead to the conclusion that there was no fraudulent inducement in securing their attendance at the said event.
It is also submitted by learned senior advocate Mr. Joshi that the applicant was not the authority competent to sanction or disburse the salaries of the complainant or the other four female workers. However, as noticed hereinabove, the applicant was serving as a Female Health Worker and the complainant, in her capacity as an ASHA Facilitator, was required to prepare supervisory reports and submit the same to the applicant. In that background, it cannot prima facie be said that the applicant had no role in supervising the work of the complainant and the other ASHA workers or that she was not in a position of authority over them," the court said.
The court dismissed the plea.
Case title: NAMRATABEN GORDHANBHAI MACWAN v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 11483 of 2026
Citation:2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 217
Appearance: LD SR ADV. MR MIHIR JOSHI ASSISTED BY MR ISA HAKIM(10874) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR MEET THAKKAR, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1