Allahabad High Court Upholds FIR in Forced Religious Conversion Case

PRAYAGRAJ, U.P., May 19, 2025: The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday refused to quash an FIR against four individuals accused of forceful religious conversion to Christianity in Uttar Pradesh, stating that the act of presuming one religion to be superior is contrary to the principles of secularism. According to a news report in the Hindustan Times on May 19, the court, while hearing the plea, emphasised that the State must maintain equal distance from all religions and upheld the constitutionality of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, 2021.

The case pertains to allegations that the accused attempted to convert people by offering money and free medical treatment. The bench of Justice Vinod Diwakar held that the charges were serious enough to warrant a police investigation and that such alleged acts, if true, amount to exploitation and manipulation under the 2021 Act.

Justice Diwakar stated that “the presumption that one religion is inherently superior to another clearly presupposes moral and spiritual superiority, which is fundamentally antithetical to the idea of secularism.” The court reiterated that Indian secularism is based on the principle of equal respect for all religions, and the State cannot align with or favour any faith.

Upholding the 2021 law, the court noted that its primary aim is to curb conversions carried out through misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion, allurement, fraud, or marriage intended solely for conversion. Such practices, the court said, have destabilising effects on social harmony and can disrupt public order.

Referring to Article 25 of the Constitution, the bench clarified that the right to profess, practise, and propagate religion is subject to public order, morality, and health. The term “freely” used in the Article underscores the voluntary nature of religious belief, and the Constitution does not protect coercive or fraudulent conversion practices.

Addressing a key legal issue, the court also ruled that a Station House Officer (SHO) can be considered an "aggrieved person" under Section 4 of the 2021 Act, allowing police to file FIRs in such cases. This interpretation, the court said, aligns with provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which authorises police action in cognisable offences.

News Source: Hindustan Times

Image Credit: Vroomtrapit at English Wikipedia