Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in UP Religious Conversion Case
The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to a Tamil Nadu resident involved in a high-profile case concerning alleged unlawful religious conversion in Uttar Pradesh's Mirzapur district. This decision marks a significant development in a legal battle that has drawn attention to the enforcement of the state's anti-conversion law.
Case Background and Arrest Details
According to police reports, the accused, Dev Sahayam Deniyal Raj, hails from Tenkasi district in Tamil Nadu and was identified as the leader of a gang. Authorities allege that this group had converted approximately 70 individuals and was in the process of planning conversions for an additional 500 people when Raj was arrested in September of last year. He, along with a co-accused named Paras, has been incarcerated since September 30, 2025.
The charges against them fall under sections 3 and 5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The Uttar Pradesh Police claim that the gang targeted poor and tribal communities, enticing them to convert to Christianity through methods such as "healing prayer meetings" and promises of financial assistance.
Legal Arguments and Court Proceedings
During the court hearings, Deniyal's legal counsel vigorously defended his innocence, asserting that he was falsely implicated in the case. A key argument centered on the validity of the First Information Report (FIR). The counsel pointed out that the FIR was lodged by Indrasan Singh, who is neither an "aggrieved individual" nor a relative or immediate family member of such an individual. This, they contended, renders the initiation of prosecution based on this FIR unsustainable under the law.
Furthermore, the defense emphasized that no incriminating evidence was recovered from the possession of the applicants, strengthening their claim of wrongful accusation. In support of their position, they referenced a recent Supreme Court judgment in Rajendra Bihari Lal and another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others 2025 (SC) 1021. This ruling clarified that under the unamended section 4 of the 2021 Act, prosecution for illegal religious conversion can only be initiated by the aggrieved individual or their immediate family members or blood relatives.
Court's Decision and Implications
In contrast, the state counsel opposed the bail petition, arguing for the continuation of detention. However, Justice Ashutosh Srivastava, in an order dated January 28, allowed the bail application. The court stated that, without commenting on the merits of the case, a prima facie case for bail was established. This decision underscores the judiciary's focus on procedural correctness and legal technicalities in such sensitive matters.
The granting of bail does not imply a judgment on the guilt or innocence of the accused but rather addresses the immediate issue of pretrial detention. It highlights the importance of adhering to statutory requirements in legal proceedings, particularly in cases involving contentious issues like religious conversion. This ruling may set a precedent for similar cases in Uttar Pradesh, emphasizing the need for proper legal footing in prosecutions under the state's anti-conversion law.
