The Allahabad High Court rejected anticipatory bail to a man who is accused of enticing 90 Hindus to convert their religion to Christianity by promising them financial and other advantages.
The bail appeal was filed by Bhanu Pratap Singh, and was denied by Justice Jyotsna Sharma’s bench. According to the reports, the FIR, in this case, was registered by Himanshu Dixit who alleged that on April 15, 2022, around 90 Hindus had gathered at the Evangelical Church of India, Hariharganj, Fatehpur, with the intention of converting their religion to Christianity.
On being informed, the government authorities arrived and interrogated the pastor named Vijay Massiah, who revealed that the conversion process had been going on for 34 days and would be completed in 40 days. The government officials discovered 35 people (listed in the FIR) and 20 unknown people involved in the conversion case.
The accused parties were also charged with attempting to convert even patients admitted to the Mission Hospital, and the hospital workers were actively engaged in this effort. The FIR was filed in accordance with sections 153A, 506, 420, 467, and 468 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, 2020.
Singh’s attorney pushed for pre-arrest release, claiming that he had been unfairly accused in the case. The attorney further claimed that the co-accused in the case had previously been granted anticipatory bail. However, the court determined that, according to the evidence presented, 26 people were detained on the scene, including Singh.
The court also noted that one of the witnesses stated in his statement under Section 161 CrPC that during the medical treatment of one of his family members, he met a woman named Lily See, who advised him to convert to Christianity because he would be given free medical assistance for the rest of his life and his children would be given jobs and money.
According to the witness, Lily See then led him to the Evangelical Church of India in Hariharganj and presented him to the accused. Besides that, the witness stated that on the day of the incident, there were around 60-70 members of one community who were being enticed to convert by the accused assuring the same guarantees.
The court also observed that identical remarks had been made by the other witnesses. As a result, the court denied Singh’s request, adding that anticipatory bail is an unusual remedy to be used only in appropriate instances.
