Since 2015, the vocal chief of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has been delving into the issue of caste albeit from the Sangh’s unique exclusivist worldview. He had begun with calling for an “end to reservations” and made a call for “more integrated reservations for all! Closer to now in October 2022 and then two month ago in February he had declared on the Sant Ravidas (Rohidas) Jayanti that caste as a category should be done away with completely!

Now, last weekend in central India, on April 16, 2023, in Madhya Pradesh’s Burhanpur district, Bhagwat, as reported by IANS, in an apparent reference to religious conversions, said on Sunday that missionaries take advantage of the situations wherein people feel that the society is not with them. He was addressing an event there, where he dedicated to the people the samadhi of Govindnath Maharaj. “We don’t see our own people. We don’t go to them and ask them. But some missionary from thousands of miles away comes and lives there, eats their food, speaks their language and then converts them,” Bhagwat said. The next day he inaugurated the Dr. Hedgewar Memorial Committee’s office building at Saraswati Nagar and address the Sangh volunteers in Burhanpur.

Elaborating on what appears to be a recurrent concern, Bhagwat also said that over the course of 100 years, people came to India to change everything. They have been working here for centuries but failed to gain anything as our roots remained strong thanks to the efforts of our ancestors, Bhagwat said. “Efforts are made to uproot them. So, the society should understand that deceit. We have to strengthen the faith,” he said. Deceptive people raise some questions about religion to waver the faith, he said, adding, “Our society never faced such people earlier so people get sceptical…We have to remove this weakness.” Ironically there is not a mention of either India’s indigenous peoples, Adivasis or caste divisions in his speech.

This at a time when the parliamentary face of the RSS, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has made political capital on Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s caste (Other Backward Caste-OBC) and further fine-tuned vote-gathering based on these social strata and divisions! Bhagwat’s comments against “missionaries” come at a time when Bishops from Kerala who also proudly claim to be from the more privileged “Brahmin” caste are cosying up to the BJP in preparation for next year’s general elections!

IANS reports that Mohan Bhagwat in Burhanpur, further said, “Even after this, our society doesn’t waver. But people change when they lose faith and feel that the society is not with them.” The RSS chief said that an entire village in Madhya Pradesh became “sanatani” 150 years after they locals got converted to Christianity as they got help from Kalyan Ashram (an RSS-backed “voluntary organisation”). “We don’t need to go abroad to spread our faith as ‘sanatan dharma’ doesn’t believe in such practices. We need to remove the deviation and distortion of the Bharatiya traditions and faith here (in India) and strengthen the roots of our ‘dharma’,” he said.

Bhagwat thereafter also addressed a Dharma Sabha and visited Gurdwara Badi Sangat to pay obeisance. After visiting the gurdwara, he said that Guru Granth Sahib is a source of inspiration for the Hindus.

RSS’ and the Hindu Right’s anathema to the social justice work in education, human rights and education carried out by the missionaries has never been concealed. The propaganda often surfaces during attacks against Christian gatherings and places of worship of Christians.

February 2023: Mohan Bhagwat: There is no caste superiority, illusion has to be set aside

At Sant Rohidas birth anniversary Sunday, Bhagwat says, “everybody is same”, “don’t be misled by caste superiority”; in 2015, his suggestion for review of reservations had led to severe backlash. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat has said the “illusion” of caste superiority is misleading and that there are no such differences between people belonging to different castes.

“Whatever the name, ability, and honour of a person, everybody is the same and there are no differences,” news agency ANI quoted the RSS chief as saying at an event Sunday marking the the 647th birth anniversary of Sant Shiromani Rohidas. 

Four months before, in October 2022, speaking at a book launch in Nagpur, Bhagwat said “varna” and “jaati” (caste) should be completely discarded, adding that “the caste system has no relevance now. Everything that causes discrimination should go out lock, stock and barrel,” the RSS chief said. Then before that in September of last year while addressing a gathering of religious leaders from among the Dalits and OBCs, in Karnataka, Bhagwat said that “efforts must be made to prevent religious conversions since they take people away from their roots”.

According to the RSS-linked ‘Samvada’ website, which quoted from his speech at that time, he went on to say: “The main problems of Hindu society such as untouchability, differences and inequality exist mainly in the mind. These problems do not exist in the scriptures…These problems have existed in our minds for many generations and their solutions will also take time. We have to slowly work to remove them from our mind.”

In January 2018, addressing stock brokers at the Bombay Stock Exchange (“Nationalism and Ethical Practices in Business”) Bhagwat had said “the ethical practices of the society is reflected in the politics of the country. For example, I don’t want to use caste politics but I am compelled to use it because the society votes based on caste. If I stay in power, only then can I change the system. So if the society changes, the politics of the country will also change, not vice-versa”.

Back in September 2015, Bhagwat’s suggestion for a review of the reservation policy had received a lot of backlash. That was when the Patel stir led by Hardik Patel had peaked in Gujarat.

In an interview to RSS mouthpieces ‘Organiser’ and ‘Panchjanya’, Bhagwat had said, “We should have an integral approach of welfare for all. It is sensible to realise that my interest lies in a larger interest. Government also has to be sensitive to these issues so that there should not be any agitation for them.” He went on propose “a committee of people genuinely concerned for the interest of the whole nation and committed for social equality, including some representatives from the society, [who] should decide which categories require reservation and for how long”.

He had also then argued that the policy of reservations based on social backwardness is not in line with what the makers of the Constitution had in mind.

Unsurprisingly, his comments unleashed strong reactions, putting the BJP on the back foot. This pushed the RSS to issue a statement that “it firmly supports the existing reservation policy enshrined in the Constitution” and that the remarks were “distorted by critics to create confusion about the organisation’s view over the issue”. The BJP also clarified that it “respected 100 per cent the reservation rights of the SCs, STs and other backward castes.”

Reacting to Bhagwat’s remarks, RJD president Lalu Prasad had, in an interview to PTI, said there was a “pattern” behind Bhagwat’s remarks, adding: “That is their (RSS) original thought process. Their psyche is against SC/ST and OBC. What was their inner core came out.”

Related:

13 Questions by Christian Laity answered: Bishop Franco Murakkal ‘Rape’ Case

How the RSS’, Golwalkar, HMS’ Savarkar glorified caste: Devanur Mahadevan

The post RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat again warns of “deceptive” missionaries taking advantage of people’s vulnerabilities appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A Catholic priest in western India sought police protection for his non-governmental organisation (NGO) after his staff members were attacked on a running train by Hindu nationalists who claimed they were missionaries involved in conversion activities.

A crowd of roughly 15 Hindu youth assaulted seven teachers of a Catholic NGO working in Dhule district in the western state of Maharashtra while traveling by express train. On January 16, the night of the attack, the team was on an education tour when the mob surrounded and attacked them at the Sangli railway station.

GunilalPawara, supervisor of a team of 42 teachers including 14 females who work for the NGO named Shirpur Vishwa Mandal Sevashram, stated that he was yanked from his bunk and hit on the head with a steel object until blood began to pour from a cut. As reported by the UCA News, Pawara further provided that the Hindu mob accused the team of attempting to convert indigenous tribal people, and had repeatedly asked for Father Constancio Rodrigues, the NGO’s director.

On January 20, Father Rodrigues told UCA News that he was supposed to accompany his team but was unable to do so at the last minute. He further asserted that the attackers knew the exact berth numbers of the team members, so it was a well-planned attack, but the mob clearly intended to target him.On January 21, a complaint was sent by the victim group to the Superintendent of Police, Belagavi and the Office of Chief Minister of Maharashtra.

Brief account of the attack

The group were going to Belagavi for an exchange of educational and social work experience there with the village level animators of Jana Jagaran Sanstha, Belagavi. Accordingly, on the morning of 16th January 2023, they started their journey from Shirpur District Dhule, Maharashtra to Belagavi by Goa Express (Nizamuddin Vasco Express) at 11.40 am.

As has been provided in the complaint, the group was sitting in coach number S6. Around 9.30 pm to 10 pm, near the Sangli railway station, some young men suddenly entered their coach, and started beating upthe group members while they were sleeping. They were asking questions such as, “Are you going for conversion?”. They were also repeatedly asking after Father Rodrigues.

As the mob got to know that the group members were a part of the Adivasi community, they started abusing them and uttering slurs. In addition to verbal abuse, the group members were also subjected to physical abuse. The mob used a walking stick, belonging to a disabled teacher Tara Singh ChaitramPawara, and steel kadas (bangles) to hit the group members.

Immediately after reaching Sangali railway station, the mob dragged some of the group members out of the train and took GunilalPawara to the railway police stationed standing at platform of Sangali Railway station. The police asked whether any quarrel had taken place. After getting to know the reason of the quarrel, the police questioned the mobregarding who they were, to which they replied they were locals. Post this, the culprits ran away from the spot.

The group then boarded the train again. On reaching the Belagavi railway station at around 1 am, the catholic group was surrounded by forty young men and was detained by the Belagavi railway police after getting down from the train. The railway police brought the group out of the station to the compound and handed them over to the Belagavi police. The police made all the member sit on the ground and questioned them. The questions ranged from asking where the group was travelling from, the purpose of their travel and the kind of education they were engaged in.

The police then gave protection to the group while they travelled to the premises of the Jan Jagran Training Centre within the St. Paul’s campus at Camp, Belagavi. As the group was travelling, they noticed that one of the teachers, BansilalShikarsingPawara, was missing in the group, and the group members claimed that he had been abducted by the mob that had attacked them. As the member informed the police that were accompany them, a police car went in search of the missing teacher. About half an hour later,Bansilal was dropped by two unknown men on a motor cycle, who then fled from the spot.

The district police inspector, who was accompanying the group, questioned Bansilal about his disappearance. Bansilal then informed that some men had closed his mouth and dragged him to a dark place after taking away his bag and shawl. The mob had then placed a sword on his throat and pointed a knife tohis stomach with the aim of forcing a false narrative out of him that the group members were being brought by force for conversion while the mob recorded the same. Bansilal had refused to give a false statement. He was then driven to a dark place near a bridge, close to the railway station, and threatened to be kill off if he did not comply, but Bansilal did not change his statement. After that, two members from the mob took him on a motor cycle and dropped him near the catholic group and fled away.

Action taken against the attack

As has been provided by Father Rodrigues, complaint against the above-mentioned incident have been sent to the Superintendent of Police, Belagavi and the Office of Chief Minister of Maharashtra.

The complaint can be read here.

To the said complaint, the Chief Minister’s office has sent their acknowledgement to the complaint sent by the group. The reply is provided below.

Father Rodrigues further provided that no arrests have been made yet. On being asked why no member of the attacking mob was arrested when they had approached the railway police at the Sangali Railway station, Father Rodrigues said that the police seemed as if they were siding with the culprits. Referring to the abduction of the member of the group, Father further said that the police took no action there too and it seemed as if they were either involved and knew everything or were protecting the ones who were responsible for the attack. Father had also added that even after returning, the group had to seek police protection at the NGO as they noticed some unidentified people keeping a watch on their activities.

The bogey of conversion and rising attacks on Christians

Christians account for 2.3 percent of India’s population of over 1.3 billion people, the majority of which are Hindus. Pro-Hindu organisations in India have intensified their enmity toward Christians by erroneously characterizing their institutions, such as schools and hospitals, as a front for religious conversions.Every time the issue of someone embracing the Christian faith comes up in India, the prevalent opinion is that the individual in question converted under duress or with some incentive. At one level, the illusion spun by the anti-Christian brigade that mass conversions will result in a sizable proportion of Hindus joining Christianity is the basis for such a notion gaining traction. On the other side, such a viewpoint implies a casteist perspective, wherein the upper caste Hindus are assuming the responsibility of “protecting and stopping” the tribals, Adivasis and Dalits from converting to Christianity, while having subjected them to systematic oppression, violence and exclusion since time immemorial. The rising attacks against Christians, can thus be safely described as attacks on Dalits and the marginalised of this country. 

Extremist Hindutva outfits have lately been involved in disrupting churches, prayer halls, and Christmas and Easter celebrations. The specter of mass conversion has been utilized repeatedly to harass Christian communities, indicating collective distress and uneasiness among Hindutva movements over the perceived insult to and abandonment of the Hindu faith by certain converts.

In the majority of these situations, the police and other authorities side with the perpetrators. The simple fact, however, is that Christianity in India offers no challenge to Hinduism’s demographic or philosophical might.

Related:

Chhattisgarh: 1,100 Christians converted to Hinduism in “gharwapsi” ceremony, by BJP Sec

Chhattisgarh: A dead woman’s ‘gharwapsi’ before final rites were allowed

Over 300 attacks on Christians reported this year, over 2000 women, Adivasis and Dalits injured

Ambedkar and the call to Conversion!

How diverse and inclusive is the Indian judiciary?

The post Hindu mob attacks Catholic NGO staff, accuses them of indulging in religious conversion appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A video has emerged on social media, wherein three Christians can be seen being subjected to verbal and physical abuse, and being accused of forcefully converting people. This video has emerged from Jhajra district of Dehradun, Uttarakhand. In the video, Radha Semwal Dhoni, Hindutva group leader, can be seen abusing and thrashing a group of Christians over the allegations of religious conversion.

The video starts with Radha Semwal asking the group of Christians, two men and one woman, to tell their name. She can be seen forcing one person, namely Manish, to give her his phone number. She then moves onto verbally and physically harassing the woman, namely Neha. She asks Neha to tell how much money she gets for allegedly indulging in these activities of religious conversion. When Neha says that she does not get any money, Radha Semwal can be seen slapping her. When another member of the group, namely Jimmy, stands up to protect Neha, Radha Semwal heckles him and threatens him of further violence.

She then goes on to accuse the three of coming to their village uninvited and trying to convert the children. Throughout the video, the three of the Christians can be repeatedly heard saying that they have come to the village to offer educational services and coaching to the children at the basic amount of fifty rupees. Radha Semwal then accused the three of forcing the students to leave idol worshipping, as is practiced by Hindus, and teaching them Bible. A young spectator is then called by Rahda Semwal, who says that at the coaching, they make them do prayers and teach them the Bible.

The video cuts to a policeman arriving on the scene. The policeman then asks the group of Christians about their vehicle. Radha Semwal then can be heard saying that the group needs to be taken to the police station and she will also be accompanying. She can further be heard saying that she will bring the mobile phone of Jimmy to the station directly, and will go through it to collect evidence against them.

The video can be viewed here: 

This is from #Jhajra, #Dehradun, #Uttarakhand.#Hindutva group leader #RadhaSemwalDhoni abused and thrashed a group of #Christians over the allegations of religious conversion.

Later, she handed them over to the police. pic.twitter.com/z8yPypI4zj

— Hate Detector ? (@HateDetectors) February 1, 2023

Interestingly, Radha Semwal was also making a live video of the whole incident, which is available on YouTube. The live has been posted with the title “धर्मपरिवर्तन कराने वालो का इलाज कर दिया | Radha Semwal Dhoni | Christian Missionaries Exposed” and has 1.3k views on it till now. This ten minute video has been recorded from Radha Semwal’s phone itself. This video starts with Radha Semwal accusing the three Christians of having converted the whole colony. She can be heard urging the woman, Neha, to show the contents of her purse.

She repeatedly harasses and accuses the three Christians of conducting religious conversions. She especially targets Neha, utters abuses, threatens violence, fat-shames her, and attacks her religion again and again. She even threatens Neha of facing violence if she is ever seen near the village.

The three Christians also explain that they belong to a non-governmental organisation and work towards providing education to children from the marginalised communities.

The video can be viewed here: 

Related:

Hindu mob attacks Catholic NGO staff, accuses them of indulging in religious conversion

Chhattisgarh: 1,100 Christians converted to Hinduism in “gharwapsi” ceremony, by BJP Sec

Chhattisgarh: A dead woman’s ‘gharwapsi’ before final rites were allowed

Over 300 attacks on Christians reported this year, over 2000 women, Adivasis and Dalits injured

Ambedkar and the call to Conversion!

How diverse and inclusive is the Indian judiciary?

The post Radha Semwal Dhoni physically assaults three Christians and accuses them of forcing children to convert to Christianity appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Chhattisgarh BJP’s state Secretary, Prabal Pratap Singh Judev conducted “ghar wapsi” of over 1,100 persons in Basna and tweeted about it on Tuesday. He washed, with Gangajal, the feet of 1,100 Christians (believed to be converted from Hinduism) who returned to Hinduism.

Local news reports quoted the converts as saying that they had strayed away from Hinduism and had accepted Christianity but they have returned now that they have realised their mistake. Kathavachak Pandit Himanshu Krishna Maharaj administered the oath.

Honored to perform #Gherwapsi of 1100 folks back to Sanatan dharma in Basna ( Chhattisgarh).

Their is pure beauty in our Roots. Our religion is the traditions of our ancestors. Embrace it ! Welcome home???@ARanganathan72 @ShefVaidya @KapilMishra_IND @AskAnshul @AshwiniUpadhyay pic.twitter.com/M6ZDuaBfq6

— Prabal Pratap Singh Judev (@prabaljudevBJP) January 24, 2023

“It is a bigger and more important task to save Hindus and stop them from converting to other faiths. Whenever Hindus have been divided, the Hindu population has declined. Let us respect our ancestors. Hindutva is a symbol of nationalism, so let us join hands to create a Hindu Rashtra”, Prabal Pratap further said, as reported by Hindupost.

Judev has been carrying out such ‘ghar wapsi’ campaigns throughout the state. In March last year, he converted 1,250 people in Mahasamund district to Hinduism. Judev aims to continue the “ghar wapsi” campaign indefinitely until every person who has been a “victim of conversion” returns to “Sanatan Dharma”.

छत्तीसगढ़ के कटांगपाली गाँव भाजपा के प्रदेश मंत्री प्रबल प्रताप सिंह जूदेव ने 1250 लोगों का गंगाजल से पाँव पखारकर ईसाई धर्म से सनातन धर्म में घर वापसी करवाई। कहा- जब तक आखिरी धर्मांतरित व्यक्ति पुनः सनातन संस्कृति से नहीं जुड़ता, निरंतर घरवापसी कार्यक्रम चलते रहेंगे। pic.twitter.com/lFKV2LLnWv

— rachna jha (@rachnajha23) March 23, 2022

As per a Zee News report, in 10 years he has converted 15,000 people to Hinduism.

Here is a tabular representation of conversion to Hinduism touted as “ghar wapsi”, that has been reported in the media over the years:

So much is the desperation to force converts back to Hinduism, that in Remawand village of Narayanpur district in Chhattisgarh a dead woman was converted to Hinduism before her last rites could be performed.

The “ghar wapsi” discourse does not find its place in the spectrum and scope of the anti-conversion laws. With several states enacting or modifying the already existing anti-conversion laws to make them more stringent, all of them have made conversion by marriage an offence, if not intimated to the administration. While the debate on violation of multiple rights is a separate one, the point to focus on in this case, is that even if conversion to other religions is punishable offence, conversion to Hinduism is not. Since “ghar wapsi” is such an ego boosting mega event for “Sanatani” Hindus, these BJP ruled states have specifically mentioned in their laws that no restrictions of religious conversion applied to those who are returning to Hinduism.

This is one of the points of contention raised by Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) in the two petitions filed before the Supreme Court which is due for hearing on January 30. CJP, in its two petitions has challenged the following laws:

1. Chhattisgarh Dharma Swantantraya Adhiniyam [Freedom of Religion] Act, 1968 (as amended by the Chhattisgarh Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2006)
2. Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003 (as amended by the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021)
3. The Haryana Prevention of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2022
4. Jharkhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2017, along with the Jharkhand Freedom of Religion Rules, 2017
5. Karnataka Protection of Freedom of Religion Act, 2022
6. Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018
7. Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021
8. Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021
9. Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2019

The post Chhattisgarh: 1,100 Christians converted to Hinduism in “ghar wapsi” ceremony, by BJP Sec appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Mr. Manu Sebastian: “An important news of this week is the Supreme Court hearing a PIL which seeks to regulate forceful conversion. The Supreme Court has observed that it is a “very serious” issue and has directed the central government to collect information from the states regarding laws made for regulating religious conversions. Several states in India have made laws to regulate religious conversion and a common feature of most of these laws is that they have a section which mandates that a person who wants to convert should give prior information to the district magistrate. It is only with the approval of the district magistrate that the person can convert. This provision is applicable even for persons who are converting for an Interfaith marriage. The Gujarat High Court last year and the Madhya Pradesh High Court last month had stayed these provisions, saying that they are violating a person’s right to privacy. The Gujarat state has approached the Supreme Court, and in the PIL proceedings, the Gujarat government told the Supreme Court that this provision regarding prior sanction of the district magistrate is a precautionary provision seeking to protect women and people belonging to backward classes. Is there a legitimate State interest in knowing if a person has changed his or her religion?”

Former SC Judge Justice Deepak Gupta had also stated last week that the Supreme Court of India should not entertain this PIL at all.

Justice Deepak Gupta: “My views are very clear. Many years ago, as a judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, I dealt with a similar provision and held it to be violative of the Constitution and said that it invades the right of privacy of a person. In fact, with this privacy judgment in the Puttaswamy case, I think my judgment becomes strengthened. What business does the government have to know what is your or my religion? Are we, in a country like India, bound to disclose what are our religious beliefs? We may not have any religious beliefs, we may be agnostics, atheists, believers, we may not be ritualistic but spiritual. In Hinduism, you have so many different ways of life. How does it concern the government what religion you belong to? Many years back, about 2-3 decades ago, the Supreme Court clearly held that Article 25 which gives the right to propagate your religion does not include the right to convert. So conversion, I understand that being made illegal if it is by allurement, by fraud, by coercion. But how can you tell a person that if I want to change my religious beliefs, why should I have to take the permission of anybody, if I am an adult? Least of all the government. I don’t need to take permission from my parents. Suppose I am born in religion ‘A’ but after growing up I believe that I want to follow religion ‘B’ or religion ‘C’, if a notice is to be given, you are inviting trouble. If the whole purpose and the stand of the government is that we have to protect the people, they’re doing a nuisance because it is going to cause more harm. There are those who want to change their faith for very personal reasons such as love, personal choice or any other reason. How on earth does the State have the right? I wonder why the State should even know my caste, leave aside my religion. They should be totally unbiased of that. If somebody breaks the law, then natural consequence should follow. But what they’re trying to do here is that if you give a notice, then obviously your family members will oppose you, your neighbours will oppose you, sometimes even the family may not oppose you but others who have no concern who are opposing and they create a scene. Are we to be ruled by a majority or by the rule of law?”

Concept of “allurement” in anti-conversion laws are kept very vague

Mr. Sebastian: “The other aspect of the debate is the concept of allurement. There is no quarrel that there should be no forceful conversion, that no one should be converted by force or coercion. But most of the states have this provision regarding inducement or allurement. The definition seems to be quite broad and vague. A person may change his religion for whatever reason, and if a person is changing his religion for monetary gains, that may be an ethically debatable issue, that could be an opportunistic act which may not meet society’s or even ethical approval, but should there be a crime for that? Should a person be penalised for doing that? Is there a State interest in that field?”

Justice Gupta: “The word allurement has been left delightfully vague in most of the enactments. There are three words used normally in all the enactments- coercion, no quarrel with that, fraud, no quarrel with that, if somebody is converted by coercion or fraud, there is no quarrel, it has to be an offence, but allurement can go to very different levels. Suppose one mission of a religion is running a hospital or a school and they’re not asking you to forcefully come and convert if you want to join the school or to go to the medical institution, but after the seeing the work being done there, maybe you got treatment, maybe the studies, you feel like changing your religion, which is your choice as long as you are an adult? I’m not going into minors changing their religion because that may be a little controversial because then you can kind of force them to move in a certain manner. But if you are an adult and if you decide to change your religion, somebody may say that it is allurement because you are being given education in a good school. I can understand it is allurement if they say that if you convert to a religion, we will give you free education and not otherwise. That may call for some criminal act. But if I converted thinking that I will benefit by the religion, I don’t see why the government should have any concern with that. Do you or I need government permission to change political views because we want political gains? We are seeing this day in and day out, elected members of every level from the Parliament down to the assemblies and Vidhan Sabhas, municipal wards, change their sides only because of political gains and nothing else. You don’t have any objection, you don’t want them to take permission from the district magistrate then, and that is something which is in the public realm. My political views, especially if I am an elected member, is in the public realm. But my religious views are my own. It is said that a man’s home is his castle, I said in my judgment that his mind is his impregnable fortress which nobody has the right to enter. And that impregnable fortress is where I think, I may not always be right in my thoughts but I have the right to believe in what I think, follow what I think as long as I don’t cause harm to any other person. The right to privacy is now held to be a fundamental right. No doubt any every fundamental right can be limited, it can be circumscribed, if there is sovereignty of the State involved, integrity of the country, law and order, or health come in. How is the change of religion of any person in this area? In fact, the problem of law and order may arise if every time you ask them to declare it in public and then these so-called people who wield the lathi or the gun will say ‘how the hell are you changing your religion? You cannot do it. Marry somebody of your own religion, don’t marry somebody else'”

Mr. Sebastian: “You are saying law and order problem is created by the vigilante mobs who are creating problem because an individual has changed his or her religion?”

Justice Gupta: “In any democratic civilised society, can we ever think of vigilantism? Can we ever think of kangaroo courts? The moment we give in to this, we are heading towards anarchy. Because we are the anti-thesis of constitutional courts of the rule of law”

Anti-conversion laws are coming for political reasons than actual reasons

Mr. Sebastian: “There are certain questions raised, there is a debate that this is an exaggeration that mass conversion is going on in many parts of the country and that it is mostly an alarm raised for furthering certain motives. Now you have dealt with the Himachal Pradesh Act in your 2012 judgment, as a judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court. In the judgment, there was an observation that for the past six years when the Act was in force, only one case has been registered- so that observation was made in that judgment. Do you think that such laws are based on exaggerated claims or is the ground reality something different?”

Justice Gupta: “I am not really competent to talk about ground realities. I can only talk about my state Himachal, and at that stage, based on the facts that were before me. I really don’t know what is happening. If people are being converted by coercion or fraud or allurement of the nature that I alluded to earlier, that may be violative of the law laid down. It is nothing wrong if the law is made to that extent. But you cannot take it to the extent that the offender would be the person who converts. Here, you are making the person who is converting the criminal. Even when there is fraud or coercion or allurement against him, that person is virtually a victim. Even if I take the other view that he has been fraudulently converted, that person is the victim, why should that person become the criminal and be charged with an offence because he or she has not applied for a permission. I can tell you one thing that I can say with certainty- these Acts are coming for political reasons more than actual reasons. I can’t talk of the whole country but in Himachal, I knew at that time that the percentage of conversion was hardly there, it is a very educated state, the literacy rate is one of the highest in the country. It is not that people don’t change religions, people change religions, people even change thoughts, you develop when thoughts change, you cannot live in the same old religious thoughts all the time. So there will be some development, religion also changes with time, it is not that it doesn’t change with time. But I’m not sure, I cannot say with certainty…because one has read reports, whether there is mass conversion in central India, in the tribal areas, where it is being said that they are almost being forced to convert, that may be there I don’t know. Interestingly, the Act in Himachal was brought in by a Congress government supported by the BJP, the only amendment that was made by the opposition was to make it archer, the Congress chief minister readily agreed to. It was passed unanimously, the Act. I only struck down that portion of the Act and the rules which asked a converted to disclose his or her intention to change the religion”

Supreme Court has better things to do than to entertain the PIL relating to conversions

Mr. Sebastian: “In the present proceedings before the Supreme Court, an interesting aspect of the case history is that the same petitioner had filed the petition before the Supreme Court itself which had come up before Justice Nariman and the bench expressed disinclination to entertain it and it was withdrawn. Then it was filed in the Delhi High Court, that was also withdrawn. The Supreme Court present bench said it won’t go into maintainability, technicality. But do you think it is a normal procedure for the Supreme Court or any other court to accept such a behaviour in a PIL petition?”

Justice Gupta: “Things grow curiouser and curiouser. I wonder why should the Supreme Court, I think it has many better things to do than to entertain a PIL of this nature. Not that this matter is not pending before the Supreme Court, it is only pending in an appeal or SLP filed by the Gujarat government against the Gujarat High Court judgment. Where is the question of saying which states have implemented or not. It is not in the domain of the judiciary to decide what sort of legislation should be passed by legislature. Why should we start asking them at the instance of a person who is in court every second day? And especially when I don’t know if he disclosed that earlier he had withdrawn the petition. He was duty-bound to disclose that. Not only that, Justice Nariman had made some observations…I believe that if you don’t find merit in the petition, just dismiss it, don’t say ‘we give you liberty to move another court’. A lot of the time, this liberty is misused”

Mr. Sebastian: “As per the records, this liberty is not seen granted. It was just withdrawn”

Justice Gupta: “Then the second petition is not maintainable”

The ambit of the word “propagate” in Article 25

Mr. Sebastian: “There is another debate regarding the ambit of the word propagate in article 25. The Supreme Court judgment has said that propagate would not amount to the right to convert somebody. What do you think, in your personal view, is the ambit of this right to propagate? Where should the right stop?”

Justice Gupta: “We are bound by the law which is written by the Constitution bench in the Rev. Stainislaus case (1977). You have ‘gurus’, you have ‘maulvis’, you have ‘sadhus’ who give lectures, everybody is free to go to that lecture, it is not limited to any one religion. If somebody comes to my colony and delivers a lecture, maybe on Christianity or Hinduism or Sikhism or Islam or anything, and I am influenced by it, and if I am an adult, I can change my religion. So that is propagation where you expound the tenets of your faith, you may praise your faith but you cannot disparage any other faith. You can say that my faith is very good but you cannot see your faith is bad. Because you have to respect each other’s religion. You can set up schools and colleges but you cannot tell them that you must become a person of that faith or religion to take benefit of the school or college. Within the ambit of the Constitution, you can reserve a certain number of seats for your own community but you cannot say that you will only admit if you get converted, that is something which is prohibited. It will depend on a case to case basis. I would agree that propagation does not include conversion. Basically, India is Hindu- please don’t take that I am saying that others have no place, in my view, all of us are to live equally together- but from our ethos…Hindu is a non-proselytising religion, whereas some of the religions of the book are proselytising religions where a person gains merit in his religion by converting others. So whether it is by the word or the sword, if you convert more people, you gain more merit. So that is not there. So that part of conversion cannot be accepted. Conversion by the word can be accepted but not conversion by the sword. I don’t mean literally by the sword…”

The interview can be watched here

Related:

False allegation of Conversion leads to the continuing Abuse against Christians

Christian Group in Bengaluru Approach the DG of Police to seek protection against targeted violence

The post State has no business to know if a person has changed religion: Deepak Gupta former SC Judge appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court on Monday, December 12, took exception to certain tasteless and scurrilous statements made against minority religions in the PIL filed by BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay alleging “mass conversions” taking place across the country, reports LiveLaw. The Court clearly asked Senior Advocate Arvind P Datar, who is appearing for the petitioner, to ensure that such remarks do not come on record.

It was senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for certain Christian organisations which are seeking to intervene in the matter, who told the bench comprising Justices MR Shah and Justice S Ravindra Bhat that the petitioner has made extremely distasteful allegations against other religions. Dave also pointed out that the petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay himself is facing a hate speech case. 

“Certain averments that some religions are perpetuating rapes and others crimes have been made by the petitioner in his affidavit from paragraph 20 onwards. These should be withdrawn. It cannot be before your Lordships”, Dave submitted. Taking note of the seriousness of these baseless averments that are also prejudicial, the bench asked Datar to ensure that such allegations are removed from the record. 

“Mr.Datar, please consider what are these allegations. These allegations being made, you consider it and moderate this. You should not have all these on record”, Justice Bhat told Arvind Datar.

“If it is a scurrilous remark or a bad remark, they will be removed”, Datar assured. “Please do that”, Justice Bhat said. “You look into it. You personally look into it”, Justice Shah also joined.

“Para 20 onwards they say. I will see it again”, Datar agreed. 

The bench adjourned the hearing to January 9 to also await the affidavit of the Central Government. The counsel appearing for the Union Government sought pass over saying that Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta was engaged in another bench. In the brief hearing today, Dave requested the bench to allow the applications filed by organisations seeking intervention in the matter. Justice Shah said that it will be considered on the next date of hearing. 

On December 12, today, there was a change in the composition of the bench which considered the matter today. A bench comprising Justices MR Shah and S Ravindra Bhat heard the matter, with the latter replacing Justice CT Ravikumar, who was unavailable today. 

On the earlier occasions, first in the end of November and thereafter on December 5, the bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar had observed that forceful conversions were a “serious issue”. Commenting also that charity cannot be used for conversion, the bench had asked the Centre to collect information from States regarding the steps taken against conversions through force or allurement. 

The bench had also then –at its last hearing–categorically stated that it will not accept the objections raised against the maintainability of the PIL by certain intervenors, who pointed out that the Supreme Court had earlier refused to entertain a similar PIL filed by the same petitioner on the same issue. The intervenor had then alleged that the petitioner was indulging in forum-shopping after unsuccessfully pursuing the matter before other benches in the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court. Several intervention applications have been filed in the Supreme Court alleging that the PIL has been filed on the basis of Whatsapp forwards and unattributed sources to create a false narrative of mass conversions.

Last week, December 5, the first intervention in this matter was filed by the Kerala Rationalist Association. Apart from providing state-wide figures on the issue of conversions that punctured the false propaganda of “mass conversions” the KRA also argues that Upadhyay’s Writ Petition in the form of a PIL engages in forum shopping and has been pursued with a political motive. The Petitioner claims to be a member of a political party and has on previous occasions approached the Supreme Court of India and the Delhi High Court with the self-same reliefs claimed in the present petition. That the Petitioner in the present Petition has tactfully suppressed details of other petitions that he filed before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court (W.P.(C)2786/2020 and W.P(C) 9442/2022) seeking similar reliefs on issue of conversion of religion. In both the aforementioned cases he withdrew his petition because of his failure to show any evidence of religious conversion, to avoid costs. Thus such acts by the Petitioner amount to forum shopping, the association argued. 

Arguments made by senior counsel CU Singh also went on then to give details of the two cases pursued by the petitioner earlier which were withdrawn by him. The KRA through its counsel had stated that this petitioner had approached the Hon’ble Court vide WP(C) 393/2021 wherein a three judge bench headed by Hon’ble Mr. Justice RF Nariman (as His Lordship then was) sternly objected to the petition and remarked that it was nothing but a Publicity interest litigation which was of a harmful kind. The bench also warned the Petitioner that heavy costs will be imposed if the matter was pressed. Following that, the Petitioner withdrew the petition.

On Friday, December 9, LiveLaw also reported that, awardee and a former member of the Planning Commission of India, Dr. Syeda Hameed has moved the Supreme Court seeking impleadment in the PIL filed by BJP leader and Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay against forced religious conversions, which is violative of Article 25 of the Constitution. Hameed has already filed a petition before the Top Court raising concerns over rising incidents of hate speech. In the present application, she claims that there is an “intrinsic relationship” between hate speech and free exercise of freedom of religion under Article 25.

In this intervention, she highlights four classes of instances where an individual is curtailed from exercising freedom of religion and conscience:

First, when ‘Hate Speech’ is systemic and widespread and explicitly targets particular religions. She submits that hate speech feeds into social discrimination, affects marginalized communities and causes loss of ‘agency’ required to exercise freedom of religion and conscience.

“Right to freedom of conscience feels affected and restricted by the stigmatizing and the push towards social and political exclusion…there have been rallies replete with speeches that directly and hatefully target a religious community.”

Second, when there is targeted sexual violence or threats of sexual violence for adhering to certain beliefs, or for professing, identifying with a religion. The application states,

“Sexual violence, or threats thereof remain one of the most potent attacks on free agency and the right to profess/ identify with a group.”

Third, repeated calls for economic and spatial apartheid.

Hameed refers to two recent events at Haridwar that allegedly targeted Muslim community and propagated violent speeches inciting their killings.

“Contents of the speech feed into an already prevailing discourse… which has no space for other cultures, traditions and practices… creating paranoia and a completely manufactured feeling of being under siege amongst ordinary Hindu citizens…such actions evoke fear, and also have the effect of inducement to the poorest vendors, who might feel compelled to hide their religious identities.“

Fourth, when such calls are made by persons holding public offices, or by persons in the media with widespread following, or even in the state’s response to the same.

Hameed claims that there have been cases where State lodged criminal cases against persons offering namaz in public spaces but no such action was taken over other forms of worship in public places.

Certain media persons with large following are also said to have openly encouraged economic and social boycott based on religious identities.

This, she claims evokes both fear and an inducement to hide personal religious convictions. 

Activist John Dayal has filed an Impleadment Application in the Writ Petition Ashwini Kumar Upadhyaya vs. Union of India Writ Petition (C) No. 63 of 2022 alleging that the petition filed by the Petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyaya is frivolous, without basis, misconceived, vague, unsubstantiated, malicious and defamatory.

The application alleged that the Additional Application for Directions to Central government which was filed by the Petitioner carries derogatory and inflammatory statements against the Christian and Muslim community. The IA states that the statements made in the Writ Petition affect the communal harmony and secular fabric of the country.

The IA further states that, “It is apposite to submit here that the people of India having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic, have secured and guaranteed all its citizen, irrespective of caste, creed and colour, certain fundamental rights embodied in the Constitution. In this backdrop the Indian Christian community is at liberty to preach, practice and propagate its religious views by exhibiting and transforming its Christian faith into actions as they are enjoined upon these rights which flow to them through Articles 19, 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India.”

Countering the argument that Christians and Muslims engage in increasing their population through forceful conversion, the IA argues, “The Christian community of India has over the many years contributed dedicatedly towards nation building. The community has sought to live out the Biblical mandate to love thy neighbors as thy self and served the marginalized and the poor. The term “forceful conversion” is misleading and cannot be termed as conversion at all.

It further states that, “religion is a personal affair, and no third party or outsider can ever have any influence on a relationship that man enjoys with his cosmos.”

It is further submitted in the IA that the “Petitioner does not have clean antecedents and is known for creating animosity between various religious groups. He is a political leader who has on many occasions filed frivolous PILs for his oblique propaganda and politics, wasting precious judicial time…Earlier this year, on 08.08.2022, the Petitioner was arrested by the Delhi police along with 5 others for organizing an event where several anti-Muslim slogans were raised. 

Academician Dr. Sakhi John has also filed an application for Intervention in the Writ Petition titled Ashwini Kumar Upadhyaya vs. Union of India W.P. (C) No. 63 of 2022 stating that the petition is not maintainable and deserves to be dismissed at the outset (in limine) as the prayers made in it by the petitioner are not tenable inasmuch as they pray for the court to legislate on the issue of forceful conversion which is the parliament’s task. 

This intervention also argues that the petition’s several averments relating to the minority communities in India are objectionable. It states, “…to say that the entire Christian and Muslim community is practicing deceitful means to convert Hindus to their faith is objectionable and untruth.”

It further states, “Petition qualifies itself as having many averments which on the face of it looks like a deliberate act on the part of Writ Petitioner to make malicious averments which has propensity to cause an outrage of the religious feelings of a class of citizens in India especially the Christians and Muslims.” 

Further, the application states that the petitioner in the abovementioned Writ Petition has not conducted any proper research before proceeding to the court under Article 32. It states, “That the Petitioner to the writ petition, who is praying for a central legislation should actually take a cue from the effectiveness of anti conversion laws which would clearly demonstrate the facts as to in how many cases force has been used, how many cases of fraud have been reported and how many cases of allurement have been brought to book. Without undertaking such an exercise, the Petitioner rushing to this Hon’ble Court invoking the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under Article 32 is nothing but an abuse of process of law.” 

Moreover, the IA states that the Petitioner has presented no data whatsoever to justify or support his averments relating to forceful conversion. It states, “a false narrative of conversion is stated in the instant Writ Petition – it is an admitted fact by the Petitioner that the Population of India as per the 2011 census shows that Christian population is only a meagre 2.30% and there is no demonstrated data to show that mass conversions are happening in the country at the behest of the Christian community.” 

Making an argument in support of the constitutional guarantee of freedom of conscience the application states, “The fact that the criminal administrative system of the states are ineffective to book people who practice force, fraud on individuals should not be a reason for making legislation which actually causes an impediment in the free expression of one’s conscience.”

The application also further argues for existence of spiritual fluidity of citizens. It states, “A spiritual fluidity that is a psychological, mental construct needs to be appreciated by this Hon’ble Court and to be left alone to the individual to select, switch, revert, convert to the level of fluidity he or she wants at any time, any place, at any instance without interference from any State or non-State actors exercising any control over the will of the person.”

Contending that religion is a private affair and any interference with it would amount to violation of an individual’s right to privacy, the application states, “This Hon’ble Court having said that sexual orientation is a strictly private affair that State cannot look into, should also consider declaring their religious orientation or a spiritual orientation falls in the same category of a strictly private and personal aspect of a person.” 

It further argues, “This Hon’ble Court speaking through a Nine Bench in Union of India vs KS Puttuswamy 2017 (10) SCC 1 has endorsed the fact that Right to Privacy is a fundamental right and part of Article 21. Thus, any effort to infringe into freedom of conscience of a person, either by a State or a Non-State actor is unconstitutional as it infringes on the Privacy of a citizen. Article 21 guarantees the Right to Privacy and the Right to Choose for every individual, that is, conversion to any religion is a private matter as well as the personal choice of the individual.”

Finally, the Application also vehemently opposes the petitioner’s statements in the writ petition stating that minorities in India are foreigners and not Indians. It states, “The Christians in India are not foreigners as stated by the Writ Petitioner. The Petitioner has tried to create a narrative that Christianity and Islam are foreign religions and has tried to demonstrate that all the followers of these two religions are also foreign.”

CJP’s challenge to the constitutionality of state anti-conversion laws, against autonomy and free choice 

In the third week of November 2022, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the earlier (2020-2021) batch of petitions challenging the Freedom of Religious Acts introduced by some states legislatures in the name of ‘love jihad‘ against religious conversions done for the sake of marriages. Senior Advocate, CU Singh, appearing on behalf of ‘Citizens for Justice and Peace‘, one of the petitioners, mentioned the pleas before a Bench comprising the Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, Justice Hima Kohli and Justice JB Pardiwala, for urgent listing. Informing the court about urgency of the matter, CU Singh informed the bench that the court had already decided the issue of right of change of faith being a part of fundamental right of choice in Shafin Jahan’s matter.

The petitions mentioned by the senior advocate CU Singh particularly challenge the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance 2020 and the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018.

The Apex Court had also issued a notice in these batch of petition in January 2021. The laws promulgated by Madhya Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh also have been challenged before the court. Last year, Madhya Pradesh government made it mandatory for people to inform the officials two months in advance about interfaith marriage or willful conversion to another religion. Section 10 of the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act stipulates punitive actions including imprisonment and penalty if an individual fails to adhere to the law.

Related:

MP: Ahead of Assembly Polls, Govt Enacts PESA 1996, CM Believes ‘It Will Stop Tribal Conversion’
No coercive action against voluntary religious conversion: MP High Court
Must take serious steps against ‘forced’ religious conversions: Centre Tells Supreme Court

The post Remove scurrilous remarks against minority religions, SC tells Ashwini Upadhay: petition against ‘mass coversions’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court on Monday, December 5, again expressed a view on religious conversion in the guise of charity, stating that the intention of persons offering such charity will have to be examined in such cases reported Bar and Bench [Ashwini Kumar Upadhay vs Union of India and ors].

A bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar also remarked that those in India have to act as per its “culture and Constitution”.

Without any hesitation, therefore, rejected the objections raised against the maintainability of a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking steps against forced religious conversion.

“We are not here to see who is right or wrong, but to set things right. If someone is offering charity to convert then need to consider their intention. Do not take it as adversarial. It is a very serious issue. When everyone is in India, they have to act as per the culture of India,” Justice Shah remarked.

He told the counsel objecting to the plea’s maintainability, to not be technical, and even handed over a copy of the pleadings when it was argued that substantial material was not put on record.The matter will now be heard on December 12 for final disposal, by when the Union government was directed to file a further counter-affidavit after getting information from States about their anti-conversion laws.

The plea by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Upadhyay has sought urgent and stringent steps to tackle “forceful religious conversions.”  The public interest litigation (PIL) petition has claimed that fraudulent and deceitful religious conversion is rampant across the country, and that the Central government has failed to control its menace.

During an earlier hearing in the case, the top court had observed that forceful religious conversion is a serious issue that “threatens national security” and citizens’ freedom of conscience. 

The fundamental right to practice and propagate any religion under the Constitution does not include any fundamental right to convert people, the Central government had told the Supreme Court in an affidavit filed last Monday.

The word ‘propagate’ used in Article 25 of the Constitution does not include within its ambit the right to convert, and the decision in Reverend Stainislaus makes clear that forced conversions impinge on a citizen’s right to freedom of conscience, it was submitted.

At today’s hearing, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta said that the Union government has collected data from States. “It is the statutory regime will determine whether person is converting due to some food etc, or any fundamental change in belief,” the SG argued.

Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for Upadhyay, said that those States that want to respond should be allowed to, but directions can be issued without waiting for everyone’s response.

“That is why we did not issue notice, since we did not want to delay the matter. Otherwise some State will ask for time,” Justice Shah responded.

Senior Counsel Raju Ramachandran and CU Singh, appearing for a priest and a rationalist organisation respectively, sought impleadment in the matter pointed out that multiple similar pleas by Upadhyay had been withdrawn after arguments.”This plea is based on hyperbole. [There is] No material at all,” it was argued. CU Singh had pointed ou how Upadhayay had filed four

Justice Shah then said the top court was the final disposal stage in the matter, and would not hear on maintainability. The counsel were, however, allowed to assist the Court. Senior Advocate Sanjay Hedge appeared for the Chhattisgarh Christian Forum.

Related:

Over 300 attacks on Christians reported this year, over 2000 women, Adivasis and Dalits injured
Survey of Churches, anti conversion laws only empower radical mobs: Archbishop Peter Machado
Hate watch: Christians attacked during Sunday mass in Chhattisgarh; 9 hospitalised 
No coercive action against voluntary religious conversion: MP High Court
India has chosen a path of exclusion and persecution for religious minorities: CMRI report

The post Those in India must act as per its culture: Supreme Court on PIL against religious conversion appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court has quashed a case of alleged forcible religious conversion, after the man who was allegedly converted gave evidence during trial that he was made to sign some papers, on the basis of which this case was filed in the first place.

The appeal challenged the judgement passed by Madhya Pradesh High Court on August 27, 2020, refusing to quash the offences under the MP Freedom of Religion Act. It was alleged that the appellant converted one Dharmendar Dohar to Christianity and violated section 3 of the MP Freedom of Religion Act, 1968. The appellant, George Mangalapilly, was also charged under Sections 153-B(1) (Imputations, assertions prejudicial to national-integration) and 295-A (Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) of the IPC.

During trial, Dohar denied that he was converted by the appellant and stated instead that his signature was taken on a piece of paper by some people, on the basis of which this case was lodged under the Act alleging forceful conversion. Dohar was deemed a hostile witness.

The bench observed that Dohar’s statement under section 164 of CrPC given before the Judicial Magistrate is identical to the statement given by him during trial in his examination-in-chief.

The appellant thus sought quashing of proceedings against him and approached the high court. The high court accepted the submissions in respect of offences punishable under Sections 153-B(1) and 295-A IPC while observing that in the absence of requisite sanction, the appellant could not be prosecuted in respect of said offences. However, with regards to offences under the Freedom of Religion Act, the court stated that evidence led before the trial court could not be relied upon to grant benefit under section 482 of CrPC to quash the proceedings. The case under Freedom of Religion Act was thus not quashed. The appellant thus filed this appeal before the Supreme Court against the High Court’s judgement.

At the outset, the court observed, “Apart from the testimony of the witness, there is nothing else on record which could potentially be relied upon against the appellant.” The court further observed that “when the entire fulcrum of the prosecution rests upon the version of the man who was stated to be forcibly converted, in our view, the testimony of said person assumes great significance.” As per his version, he was not forcibly converted and neither was he contacted by the appellant at any point.

The man who was purported to have been forcibly converted as per the FIR, was in fact, not converted by the appellant as he clearly stated before the Magistrate as well as at the trial court during trial. His unwavering assertion convinced the Supreme Court since the entire cases rests upon this man who is supposed to have been forcibly converted.

The court, thus, allowed the appeal and quashed the proceedings against the appellant in respect of offence punishable under Section 3 & 4 of the MP Freedom of Religion Act.

The order may be read here:

Related:

The bogey of ‘Love Jihad’

Allahabad HC grants bail in alleged conversion case

Police cracking down on voluntary interfaith unions in Guj, UP

The post SC quashes alleged forcible conversion case, after man denies being converted by accused appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Allahabad High Court has granted bail to a man accused under the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Religion Conversion Act while observing that the complainant was a major and was in a relationship with the applicant.

The applicant, Sonu Rajpoot a.k.a Zubair was charged under sections 376 (sexual assault), 420 (cheating) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of IPC as also under the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Religion Conversion Act. The counsel for the applicant argued that he has been falsely implicated. It was contended that the alleged incident took place on November 28, 2020 but the FIR was filed on December 29, 2020 and the delay is unexplained.

He asserted that the complainant on her own free-will travelled with the applicant as is evident from the FIR itself as both of them were in love and used to spend time together. But then she states that on the day of occurrence the applicant established a physical relationship against her wishes. He further stated that the medical examination of the survivor was conducted on January 4, 2021 whereby the doctors opined there were no signs of force. He submitted that the informant claims that she did not know the applicant was a Muslim until she saw his name written in the register of the hotel where she had gone with him and a dispute arose. He argued that the informant was a consenting party, a major aware of worldly affairs, and used to spend time with the applicant out of her own volition.

The bench of Justice Samit Gopal observed that it is apparent that the victim/first informant is a major girl and that the applicant and the informant “were in relationship since long and she used to spend time with the applicant and used to travel with him and went to a room of a hotel on her own sweet-will.” The court stated that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and no possibility of tampering with the evidence, the applicant can be enlarged on bail.

The court allowed the bail application and directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, on the condition that he will not tamper with evidence; will attend the court on every date; will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner and shall not misuse the liberty of the bail.

The order may be read here:

Related:

The accused has the right to have bail plea heard in reasonable time: Allahabad HC
Rape allegations become false once marriage is admitted: Allahabad HC
US Government lambasts India on Freedom of Religion 

The post Allahabad HC grants bail to man charged under anti-conversion law appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Gujarat Assembly has passed the Freedom of Religion Bill, 2021, that seeks to amend the Freedom of Religion Act, 2003. After Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat has become the latest state to pass its own ‘love jihad’ law to penalise religious conversion by fraudulent means including marriage.

According to LiveLaw, under section 4 of the Bill, a person guilty of forceful conversion of an adult, will be punished with minimum imprisonment of three years (which may extend to five years) and four years (which may extend to seven years) if the case involves a minor, woman or someone belonging to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe.

Section 3A of the Bill provides that any aggrieved person, his parents, brother, sister, or any other person related by blood, marriage or adoption may lodge an FIR at the police station having jurisdiction, against the person for an offence committed under this law.

Section 3 of the Freedom of Religion Act provides that no person shall convert or attempt to convert, either directly or otherwise, any person from one religion to another by use of force or by allurement or by any fraudulent means nor shall any person abet such conversion.

The amendment Bill has introduced a third category of allurement or offer of temptation to the existing gift or gratification (either in cash or kind) and a grant of any material benefit, monetary or otherwise. The third category reads, “better lifestyle, divine blessings or otherwise”.

LiveLaw reported that section 4(C) states, “If any institution or organisation is found contravening the law, then every person who was in charge or was responsible for violation of law could be punished for imprisonment for three years (may extend up to 10 years) in jail and a fine of up to Rs. 5 lakhs can be imposed.”

Under the new Bill, it places the burden of proof of innocence on the person who caused the conversion, similar to that of the other anti-conversion laws passed in some states. The offences under the Bill are reportedly cognisable, non-bailable and the marriages solemnised for the purpose of such conversion will be declared void. 

Related:

Bill against ‘love jihad’ to be tabled in Gujarat Assembly
Gujarat: Are BJP leaders counseling women against inter faith marriages?
Gujarat to get its own ‘Love Jihad’ law?

The post Gujarat Assembly passes Freedom of Religion Amendment Bill, 2021 appeared first on SabrangIndia.