The Allahabad High Court recently pulled up an additional district magistrate (ADM) for rejecting an application moved by a Muslim man under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 for recognition of his conversion to Hinduism.
The man, an assistant professor, said that he had performed the conversion at a temple in 2022 and later married a Hindu woman, a college lecturer. Their marriage was objected to by the woman’s father, who accused him of illegal conversion and got registered a criminal case against him.
A Bench of Justices Ajit Kumar and Indrajeet Shukla found that the police had informed the ADM twice about the genuineness of the man’s conversion, but his application for conversion was rejected after registration of the first information report (FIR).
The Court said that the man had complied with the procedure by filing a declaration in 2022 that he wanted to practice Sanatan rituals and, therefore, voluntarily had converted himself. It added the police reports were also in his favour.
However, the Court noted that instead of proceeding with the conversion application, the ADM asked the police to submit another report in light of the criminal case. The Court said that the ADM had nothing to do with the criminal case which alleged that he had enticed away the woman for marriage.
“We do not appreciate this act and conduct of the Additional District Magistrate for the reason that the Additional District Magistrate had nothing to do with the criminal investigation matter forcing the police to again and again submit report taking notice of a criminal case registered against the applicant and this amounts to exercising a power not vested with the Additional District Magistrate under the Act,” the Bench said.
With regard to the criminal case, it opined that the manner in which the investigating officer had submitted the chargesheet itself showed that “no intrinsic material was collected at all to frame the applicant into the charge of illegal conversion.”
The Court interacted with the woman, who said that she had voluntarily married the man as per Hindu customs and rites. She also denied claims of receiving any money for it, explaining that he had helped her earlier by giving her ₹1 lakh when her mother had a serious kidney issue.
The Bench remarked that merely because certain monetary transactions had taken place between friends, it was not sufficient to draw any inference that there was undue influence in the case.
“We are of the considered view that the Additional District Magistrate ought to have passed order on the basis of first two inquiry reports, instead of getting influenced by the subsequent police inquiry report, which was based only upon the FIR and the charge-sheet submitted by the police. It is a well settled law that mere filing of the charge-sheet does not result in indictment of the accused of the alleged offence. It is always a subject matter of trial after framing of the charges. Therefore, even a prima facie view taken on the basis of charge-sheet would be erroneous,” it added.
Considering that it was a sensitive matter involving two educated persons, the Court asked the ADM to pass a fresh order on the application seeking recognition of the conversion.
It asked the officer to take a pragmatic view of the matter “in the light of first two reports that have been discussed above in our order and also in the light of our reference made during interaction with the petitioner”.
Further, the Court said that the man would be at liberty to live his married life with the woman with dignity. The police will not be interfering in their married life, it added.
The matter will be next heard on May 27.
Advocate Ashish Kumar Srivastava represented the petitioner.
Advocate Mukul Tripathi represented the State. He was assisted by Advocate Shruti Malviya.