

The Allahabad High Court has directed authorities in Uttar Pradesh to produce Ayush Malik before the Court on a plea alleging that he has been kept in illegal custody by his family after he converted to Islam and married a Muslim woman [Ayush Malik and Another v State of UP and 3 Others]
Malik's conversion from Hinduism to Islam had led to the arrest of the Muslim woman Chandni Qureshi and her father under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 in a case registered by Shamli police.
Malik, who had changed his name to Mohammad Ali, had told the media that he had converted to Islam voluntarily. However, his businessman father claimed that he was coerced by the Muslim woman and her family to gain control over their property.
Malik later reportedly returned to Hinduism.
In a fresh twist to the story, a habeas corpus petition before the High Court states that Malik's father has deprived him of his personal liberty and kept him in illegal custody with the active assistance of the State machinery.
The petition has been filed by one Sultan, who said he was Malik's friend.
On September 9, Justice Sandeep Jain observed that Malik prime facie appeared to have voluntarily renounced Hinduism, embraced Islam and married the Muslim woman against the wishes of her father.
The Court said the allegations of his illegal custody warrant immediate consideration and directed the State and Malik's father to ensure his production before the Court on September 16.
It added that in case Malik is not produced before the Court, the State authorities shall disclose the reasons for his non-production, and the steps taken by them to ensure his presence.
"The allegations made by learned counsel for the petitioner regarding the alleged illegal detention of the corpus and the purported involvement of the State authorities and their functionaries in facilitating such detention are serious in nature and, therefore, warrant immediate consideration by this Court," the Court said.
Advocates Deepak Singh, Mohammad Khalid and Umar Khalid represented the petitioner.
[Read Order]