'Distributing Bible, Preaching Religion No Crime': Allahabad High Court Pulls Up UP Police For Overreach In Conversion Case

In a strongly worded order, the Allahabad High Court recently observed that the mere distribution of the Bible or the act of preaching a religion does not constitute an offence under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. A bench of Justice Abdul Moin and Justice Babita Rani also admonished the UP Police for what it termed as "bending backward" to arrest the accused immediately after the FIR was lodged, despite the absence of any victim coming in front at that stage to substantiate claims of forced conversion. The HC made these observations while dealing with a plea filed by the accused seeking to quash an FIR lodged against them under the 2021 Act. Briefly put, the FIR was lodged by one Manoj Kumar Singh, who alleged that the petitioners had organized a prayer meeting to convert Dalits and poor sections of society. The complainant stated that upon reaching the petitioners-accused's residence, he found an LED screen installed in the verandah where the accused were "preaching the tenets of Christianity" and distributing Bibles. In the quashing plea, the Court referred to Section 3 of 2021 Act, which prohibits conversion by misrepresentation, force, undue influence or allurement. The Bench noted that the sine-qua-non for invoking this provision is the presence of a specific 'person' who alleges they are being converted. The Court further noted that in this case, at the time the FIR was lodged on August 17, 2025, no such victim had come forward and the FIR only mentioned the recovery of an LED screen and Bibles. "From perusal of the FIR it does not emerge that at the time of lodging of the FIR... any person had come forward indicating that he had been converted to any other religion," the Bench observed. In fact, though one of the victims his initial statement (September 4) did not indicate anything about conversion, on October 25, almost two months after lodging of FIR, he stated that he was given allurement to change his religion. The bench remarked that considering that the 2021 Act is a special Act, the authorities should have applied their mind to the fact that on the date the said incident is committed (August 17) there was nothing to indicate the commission of the said offence. Noting this delay, the bench said: "Thus, it is prima facie apparent that the authorities have bent themselves backward in order to arrest the petitioner(s) even though it is not known as to how the complainant had got information about any offence... These are all strange facts which need to be explained," the Court remarked. Importantly, the Court referred to Supreme Court's recent judgment in Rajendra Bihari Lal vs. State of U.P. 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1021, the Bench reiterated that since the 2021 Act is a "special Act," authorities are bound to adhere strictly to its provisions rather than acting on presumptions. The Court also questioned the conduct of the complainant and issued notice to him, demanding an explanation in a counter affidavit regarding his authority to raid the petitioners' home. The Court posed the following questions: From where did he get information about the alleged offence? How did he mobilize a crowd to accompany him to the house of the accused? If he "barges into the house of a third person", what offence have the petitioners committed by trying to stop him? The Bench further asked how charges under Section 352 (intentional insult to provoke breach of peace) and Section 351(3) (criminal intimidation) BNS, could be sustained against the petitioners when they were potentially defending their property from intrusion. The matter is listed for a fresh hearing after four weeks.Case title - Ram Kewal Bharti @ Bablu And Others vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And OthersClick Here To Read/Download Order

'Distributing Bible, Preaching Religion No Crime': Allahabad High Court Pulls Up UP Police For Overreach In Conversion Case

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags