Shriniwas Rav Nayak    [Applicant] Vs. State of U.P.   [Opposite Party]

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 11804 of 2024

(Hon’ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)

Facts: By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 78 of 2024, under Sections 3/5 (1) of Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act of 2021’), Police Station- Nichlaul, District- Maharajganj seeks enlargement on bail, during the pendency of trial.

Issue: Whether the applicant’s case is fit for being granted bail in the present facts?

Arguments on behalf of counsel for applicant:

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has no connection with the alleged conversion and is a domestic help of one of the co-accused and is resident of Andhra Pradesh and has been falsely roped in in the instant case. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the FIR does not disclose any religion convertor as defined under Section 2(I)(i) of the Act of 2021. Further, statement of witnesses as alleged by the Police cannot be accepted as no undue influence was put for converting. Moreover, no person who has accepted Christianity has come forward to make any complaint.

Arguments on behalf of counsel for opposite party:

Learned A.G.A. while opposing the bail application has submitted that mass conversion was going on, and the informant who was asked to accept Christianity had refused and had informed the Police in writing upon which the applicant was arrested. According to him, case under Section 3/5 of the Act of 2021 is made out against the applicant who is a resident of Andhra Pradesh and had come to the place in question at Maharaj ganj where the conversion was taking place and was actively participating in the conversion from one religion to another which is against the law.

Held: The court rejected the present application and held that, “In the instant case, the informant was persuaded to convert to another religion, which is prima facie sufficient to decline bail to the applicant as it establishes that a conversion programme was going on where many villagers belonging to Scheduled Castes community were being converted from Hindu religion to Christianity. There arises no occasion as to why the informant would rope in the applicant, who is a resident of Andhra Pradesh, falsely in a case of unlawful religion conversion. Neither in the bail application nor during argument, it has been submitted that there stood any enmity between the informant and the applicant.”