The Gujarat High Court recently declined to grant any relief to several men accused in a case of forced religious conversion, overruling their argument that they could not be made the accused in such a case since they were themselves converts from another faith [Varyava Abdul Vahab Mahmood vs State Of Gujarat].
Justice Nirzar S Desai refused to accept an argument that these accused could also be termed as victims of religious conversion since they were earlier Hindus and had converted to Islam.
The Court reasoned that, prima facie, the accused did not appear to be victims since they had themselves influenced and pressurized others to change religions.
“On account of their act of influencing and pressurizing and alluring other persons to convert to Islam, as can be seen from the FIR as well as statements of the witnesses, of course, those allegations are prima facie in nature for which today, upon examination of material produced, the Court is of the view that conversion of the victims indicates that a prima facie offence is made out. Therefore, it cannot be accepted that those persons who are arraigned as accused who are originally Hindus and subsequently were converted to Islam, can be said to be the victims on account of allegations made in the FIR as well as the material collected during the course of investigation by way of charge-sheet papers,” the Court said.
The allegation against three of the accused, who were earlier Hindus and converted to Islam, was that they, along with others, allured Hindu villagers in Bharuch’s Amod to change their religion by promising them new houses, food-grain, cash and jobs.
It is alleged that 100 persons belonging to 37 families were converted from Hinduism to Islam by the accused in this manner.
The accused were booked under various provisions of Indian Penal Code, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Information Technology Act, and the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003. A total of 16 persons are accused in the case, but the investigation in respect of five accused is not yet complete.
Six petitions were filed in 2022 seeking the quashing of the First Information Report (FIR). However, the Court declined to interfere with the trial or the investigation.
“Considering the fact that after their conversion to Islam, it is alleged that those persons also indulged into activity of pressurizing and alluring other persons as alleged in the FIR and as can be seen from the papers available on record, it is their further act of converting further people around 100 in numbers of 37 families to Islam would prima facie make out an offence against them and, therefore, I do not see any reason to interfere with the trial,” the Court said.
The Court, however, granted liberty to some of the accused to avail appropriate remedies once the investigation is over and the chargesheet is filed.
Senior Counsel IH Syed with advocates Muhammad Quasim Vora, Anik Kadri, MTM Hakim, Arjun M Joshi Isa Hakim appeared for the accused.
Additional Advocate General Mitesh Amin, Public Prosecutor Hardik A Dave with Additional Public Prosecutors Ronak Raval and Trupesh Kathiriya represented the State.
Senior Counsel Maulin Raval with advocates Harshesh Kakkad, Ruchika Kakkad, Yogini Parikh, Yash J Patel, Ogini Parikh, RC Kodekar, Parthiv A Bhatt and Maharshi Patel appeared for other respondents.
[Read Judgment]