The Division Bench also pulled up the Uttar Pradesh Police for registering an FIR (First Information Report) without any identifiable victim and for acting “in haste” in a matter where no one claimed to have been converted.
The Allahabad High Court’s ruling underscores that distributing Bibles or preaching Christian doctrine, in the absence of coercion or inducement, is not a criminal act under the Uttar Pradesh anti-conversion law.
By criticizing the police for registering an FIR without an identifiable victim or an allegation of actual conversion, the Court reaffirmed the limits of the 2021 Act and emphasised constitutional protections for religious freedom.
The decision reinforces the principle that lawful religious expression cannot be treated as a criminal offence, and that police must exercise caution before invoking stringent statutes designed to address forced conversions.
The case arose after the police filed an FIR based on a complaint alleging that the accused was hosting religious gatherings at his residence, displaying content on an LED screen, delivering sermons, and distributing Bibles. The bench observed that such activities, without coercion or inducement, cannot attract provisions of the anti-conversion law.
“Merely distributing Bibles and preaching Christian doctrine, without any allegation of forcible or fraudulent conversion, does not constitute any offence,” the court remarked, granting bail to the accused and issuing notice to the complainant.
According to media reports, a central reason for the High Court’s intervention was the absence of a complainant who claimed to have been converted or pressured into conversion. The bench underlined that the FIR failed to identify any individual who was subjected to inducement, threat, or coercion — key elements required to invoke the 2021 Act.
“At the time of the FIR, there was no victim,” the bench observed, emphasizing that the complaint made no claim of conversion or attempt to convert.
This gap, the court stated, rendered the police action premature and unsupported by the statutory requirements of the anti-conversion law.
The judgment underscores that the mere act of distributing Bibles or preaching cannot automatically trigger the anti-conversion law, as these constitute lawful religious practices unless accompanied by prohibited methods.
