MP Freedom Of Religion Act: Supreme Court Stays Criminal Proceedings Against Man Accused Of Forcing Family To Convert

The Supreme Court today stayed further criminal proceedings against a man, stated to be professing Hinduism, who is accused of forcing a family in Madhya Pradesh to convert to Islam.

A partial Court working days bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar passed the order, while issuing notice on the man's plea challenging an MP High Court order which refused to quash an FIR under Sections 3 and 5 of the MP Freedom of Religion Act and Section 506 IPC.

As per the FIR, the complainant's husband converted to Islam 8 years back on the advise of the petitioner. For the past 1.5 years, she is also allegedly being pressurized to convert to the same religion. On one occasion, it is stated, the petitioner suggested her to convert to Islam.

During today's hearing, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the FIR was delayed by 8 years, as the complainant's husband converted to Islam 8 years earlier. He also informed that the petitioner and his family were practicing Hindu religion.

Hearing the submissions, the Court issued notice and stayed further criminal proceedings against the petitioner.

To recap, initially, the petitioner approached the High Court claiming that there was no evidence linking him to the alleged crime. It was argued that the charges merely suggested that he had motivated the complainant's husband to convert to Islam, without providing any evidence of direct involvement in the conversion of the complainant or her minor son. The petitioner further contended that the sections in the FIR were invoked without substantiation and that the case lacked prima facie merit.

The State opposed the plea, highlighting statements recorded during the investigation, including those of the complainant's minor son, which implicated the petitioner. It was argued that the investigation was complete and that the chargesheet was filed based on sufficient material to sustain the allegations.

Vide the impugned order, the High Court observed that there was prima facie material connecting the petitioner to the alleged offence. It noted that the statements of the complainant and her minor son specifically mentioned the petitioner's role in pressuring the complainant's family.

The Court relied on Neeharika Infrastructure v. State of Maharashtra, where the Supreme Court cautioned the High Courts from passing orders not to arrest or "no coercive steps to be taken" till the investigation is completed and the final report is filed, while not entertaining quashing petitions under Section 482 CrPC and/or Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Following these guidelines, the Court emphasized that the question of the petitioner's involvement was to be examined during the trial through cogent evidence. It was stated that the petitioner would have the opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses and present his defense. The Court concluded that quashing of the proceedings would be premature. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed. Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court.

Case Title: Hemraj Tailor v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another, SLP(Crl) No. 12057/2026