Allahabad HC Flags Concerns About False Cases Being Registered By Third Parties Under Anti Conversion Law
It is definitely most worrisome and a matter of grave concern that definitely cannot be ignored any longer that none other than Allahabad High Court which is the biggest High Court in not only just India, in not only just Asia, in not only just few continents but in whole world and all the continents and that too not by a Single Judge Bench but by a Division Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Abdul Moin and so also Hon’ble Mr Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Mohd Faizan and Others vs State of UP and Others in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. – 2962 of 2026 that was pronounced as recently as on April 13, 2026 has flagged its utmost serious concerns about a very “disturbing trend” of false cases being registered by third parties under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. It is certainly worth paying singular attention that the Division Bench expressed its extreme concerns in a case where three Muslim men were booked under the 2021 anti-conversion law titled Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The Division Bench deemed it fit to stay their arrest as no case was made out for arresting them!
It must be underlined that the Division Bench also most commendably took note of the growing disturbing trend of third parties registering such cases. It was observed most specifically by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court that, “This is a disturbing trend which has crept in the society now and which has also been indicated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra Bihari Lal vs State of U.P. & Ors. : 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2265.” The Division Bench then proceeded to summon the complainant (father of the alleged victim), asking him to explain why action be not taken against him for having lodged prima facie a patently false, fake and frivolous FIR.
For my esteemed readers exclusive indulgence, it must be laid bare that the Division Bench was hearing a petition that sought quashing of a First Information Report (FIR) that had been registered under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 by Police Station Kotwali Nagar in district of Bahraich. It must be noted that the case was registered on the complaint of a man who alleged that his daughter was enticed away by a Muslim man with the help of two others. The complainant said that there was every likelihood of the accused trying to change the religion of his daughter and to force her to marry a Muslim man.
However, the Division Bench found that the alleged victim in her statement before the Magistrate has said that she is an adult and in love with the man for the past three years. It noted that though Section 69 of the BNS has been dropped, the Investigating Officer has proceeded with further investigation under other offences. The Court said that, prima facie, the Investigating Officer was acting under pressure or was ‘persuaded’ by some other factors.
We need to note that the Division Bench also ordered that the petitioners (accused men) shall not be arrested till further orders. Further, it must also be borne in mind that the Division Bench took note of the apprehension expressed by the woman that she is apprehensive of her safety and the safety of her relatives after her statement. It was also ordered by the Division Bench specifically that adequate State security shall be extended both to the petitioners (accused) as well as the victim and her family members.
From my perspective, there has to be zero tolerance for those who initiate false cases under anti conversion law. Those who still indulge in the same deserve the most strictest punishment under the law. When conversion can be punished most strictly then why should action not be taken against those who file false cases under anti-conversion law as demanded most commendably even by the Allahabad High Court in this leading case?
At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by the Division Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Abdul Moin and so also Hon’ble Mr Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava of Allahabad High Court sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA for respondents no.1 to 3.”
As we see, the Division Bench then directs in para 2 mandating that, “Issue notice to respondent no.4. Steps be taken within a week.”
While laying bare the purpose of the petition, the Division Bench specifies in para 3 stating that, “Instant petition has been filed praying for quashing of the FIR bearing no.0066/2026 under Sections 87, 69, 351(3) of B.N.S. 2023 and Sections 3 & 5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bahraich.”
To put things in perspective, the Division Bench envisages in para 4 that, “From perusal of the allegations as levelled in the impugned FIR it emerges that the respondent no.4 has lodged the said FIR by contending that his daughter has been enticed away by the petitioner no.3 with the assistance of other petitioners. It has been alleged that there is every likelihood of the petitioners trying to change the religion of the complainant’s daughter and to force her to marry. It has also been alleged that all the persons as named in the FIR are harassing the complainant and his wife and are forcing them to change their religion.”
As it turned out, the Division Bench enunciates in para 5 that, “Disputing the allegations as levelled in the impugned FIR and vehemently contending the same to be totally false the instant petition has been filed.”
It is worth noting that the Division Bench notes in para 6 that, “Learned AGA has produced the statement of the alleged victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS 2023 on 09.04.2026 per which she has indicated that she is major aged about 18 years. She is in love with petitioner no.3 since last three years. She has further stated that her religion has not been changed neither the petitioner has married her nor has established physical relations with her neither the petitioner no.3 or his relatives have coerced the victim to change her religion. She has further stated that she wants to reside with petitioner no.3 and her religion has not been changed. She has also prayed in her statement that the members of the Hindu Organizations should not harass her or her relatives.”
Quite significantly, it just cannot be glossed over that the Division Bench points out in para 7 holding that, “Needless to mention that the statement under Section 183 of BNSS 2023 is recorded before the learned Magistrate. Once the statement of the alleged victim had been recorded on 09.04.2026 which patently belies the allegations as levelled in the impugned FIR it was the duty of the Investigating Officer to have proceeded accordingly. However, for reasons best known, the Investigating Officer took a peculiar turn as emerges from a perusal of the Case Diary No.9 dated 10.04.2026 per which the Investigating Officer has recorded that after perusal of the statement of the victim under Section 183 of BNSS 2023 no case of rape is made out and consequently Section 69 of BNS 2023 has been dropped. However, the matter has been proceeded further for investigation under Sections 87, 351(3) of BNS 2023 and 3/5(1) of the Act, 2021 against three persons. Why we use the words ‘peculiar turn’ is that when from the statement of the alleged victim none of the offences as indicated under Sections 87, 351(3) of BNS 2023 and 3/5(1) of the Act, 2021 emerged and that statement, as already indicated above, has been recorded before the learned Magistrate which also finds place in the version of the Investigating Officer the requirement of further investigation by the Investigating Officer is not understood. Prima facie, it emerges that the Investigating Officer is acting under pressure or is ‘persuaded’ by some other factors. We need not say anything more at this stage.”
Most significantly and so also most forthrightly, the Division Bench encapsulates in para 8 what constitutes the cornerstone of this notable judgment postulating precisely that, “he statement of the victim vis-a-vis the allegations as levelled in the FIR gives rise to a disturbing trend which is being noticed time and again by the courts of law pertaining to FIRs being lodged by third parties under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 2021’). The statement of the victim itself indicates that she is apprehensive of her safety and the safety of her relatives after her statement being recorded and she being apprehensive of being harassed and troubled by the various Organizations.”
Equally significant is that the Division Bench while continuing in the same vein points out emphatically in para 9 that, “This is a disturbing trend which has crept in the society now and which has also been indicated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra Bihari Lal vs State of U.P. & Ors. : 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2265.”
As a corollary, the Division Bench then directs and holds in para 10 that, “Considering the aforesaid, the Court thus requires the respondent no.4 to appear in person on the date fixed and explain as to why action be not taken against him for having lodged prima facie a patently false, fake and frivolous FIR.”
It would be instructive to note that the Division Bench then hastens to add in para 11 noting that, “he Additional Chief Secretary(Home), Government of U.P. shall also file his personal affidavit indicating as to what action is being taken in such cases where FIRs are being lodged left and right under the provision of the Act 2021 and subsequent thereto the FIRs turned out to be patently fallacious whereby spending valuable time of the authorities in chasing such FIRs which do not even have any legs to stand on.”
It would be worthwhile to note that the Division Bench then directs and holds in para 12 that, “The personal affidavit shall be filed by the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) within the aforesaid period of time, the matter to be listed on 19.05.2026.”
In addition, the Division Bench stipulates in para 13 observing that, “In case the personal affidavit is not filed, the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) shall appear in person along with the records to assist the Court.”
Further, the Bench then stipulates in para 14 holding that, “Till then, the petitioners shall not be arrested in pursuance of the said FIR.”
What’s more, the Division Bench then further observes in para 15 directing and holding that, “Further, considering the statement of the victim as recorded under section 183 of the BNSS, adequate State security shall be extended both to the petitioners as well as the victim and her family members, which shall be provided within three days from today.”
Finally, the Division Bench then concludes by holding in para 16 stipulating that, “The personal affidavit to be filed by the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) should also indicate about the compliance of this order including providing of security to the persons as indicated above.”
All said and done, it warms the innermost cockles of my heart to note that the Allahabad High Court in this leading case has not only just stayed the wrongful arrest of three Muslim men in a case that was lodged under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 but has also taken the UP State Government to task and asked that, “What action taken against false cases lodged under anti-conversion law? If conversion is a crime then lodging false cases under anti-conversion law by any measure and certainly by any reckoning is ostensibly a far bigger crime as it implicates innocents rendering them to be punished and sent to jail for no fault of theirs and should be undoubtedly most strictly punished as it definitely deserves only zero tolerance! No denying or disputing it!
Author Bio
