Breaking News :
To Whom Does This Land Belong?    Kashmiri Shawl Seller Assaulted, Robbed in Punjab—Third Attack in 45 Days    Jamia Students Rally Against Crackdown on Campus Activism    AI Summit Divided: India Pushes for Inclusive Rules as US, UK Reject Paris Communique    Bangladesh Witnesses Wave of Violent Attacks Against Monuments of Liberation War    CPI Raises Alarm Over Chhattisgarh Encounters, Demands Inquiry    Govt’s 15-Point Plan Focuses on Education, Employment & Social Welfare for Minorities: Rijiju    Unchecked and Unregulated: How Illegal Constructions Soar in Kolkata Under TMC’s Watch    India’s Got Latent Row: Assam Police Book Ranveer Allahbadia, Samay Raina and Others    SC Reserves Verdict on WBSSC Job Scam Case, Questions Data Authenticity    Why Has Manipur Governor Not Convened Assembly Session? Congress Questions Delay    Far-Right Leaders Gather in Madrid to 'Make Europe Great Again'    Bipartisanism Wins in Ecuador: Noboa And González Head to Presidential Run-Off    Rajasthan: BJP Pulls Up Minister Kirodi Lal Meena Over Phone-Tapping Remark    Modi’s France Visit: Meets ‘Friend’ Macron & US VP JD Vance    Parrhesia as Political Resistance: The Bishop That Spoke Truth to Power    FIR Filed Over ‘Beef Biryani’ Notice at AMU, University Cites Typing Error    Modi Govt’s ‘U-Turn’ on CLND Act a Bid to Appease Foreign Nuclear Firms: Congress    Indian Rupee Plunges to All-Time Low of 87.95 Per Dollar in Early Trade    Delhi Elections: The End of a Myth And the Magnification of a Tragedy   
Law

SC Criticizes Allahabad HC for Denying Bail in Religious Conversion Case

The Supreme Court also criticized the prosecution for opposing bail without justifiable grounds, contributing to unnecessary delays and burdening higher courts with appeals.

SC Criticizes Allahabad HC for Denying Bail in Religious Conversion Case

The Allahabad High Court and the Supreme Court of India (Bill graphic)

The Supreme Court on Monday (January 27) criticized the Allahabad High Court for its refusal to grant bail in a case concerning alleged unlawful religious conversion.

The Court expressed dissatisfaction, noting that the High Court's denial of bail appeared to disregard established principles governing bail and raised concerns about the motivations of the presiding officer, Live Law reported.

The bench, comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, emphasized that bail applications in cases involving less severe allegations should not escalate to the Supreme Court.

The Court remarked, “We can understand that the trial court declined bail as trial courts seldom muster the courage of granting bail, be it any offence. However, at least, it was expected of the High Court to muster the courage and exercise its discretion judiciously," reported Live Law.

The case involved a Maulvi arrested under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, for allegedly converting a mentally challenged minor to Islam. The prosecution alleged the child was forcibly kept at a Madarasa and converted, leading to charges under Sections 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 3 of the 2021 Act.

The Maulvi, however, contended that he had provided the abandoned minor with shelter out of humanitarian concern, with no coercion or forced conversion involved. He sought bail on the grounds of having already spent 11 months in custody, while the trial remained incomplete, and witnesses had already been examined.

Both the trial court and the High Court denied bail, prompting the Maulvi to approach the Supreme Court.

Overturning the High Court's decision, the apex court observed, "We are conscious of the fact that grant of bail is a matter of discretion. But discretion has to be exercised judicially keeping in mind the well settled principles of grant of bail. Discretion does not mean that the judge on his own whims and fancy declines bail saying conversion is something very serious. The petitioner is going to be put to trial and ultimately if the prosecution succeeds in establishing its case, he would be punished.”

The Court expressed disappointment with trial courts and High Courts, stating that despite numerous seminars and workshops on bail-related jurisprudence, many judges fail to exercise their discretion appropriately.

The Supreme Court also criticized the prosecution for opposing bail without justifiable grounds, contributing to unnecessary delays and burdening higher courts with appeals.

Allowing the appeal, the Court directed the trial court to release the Maulvi on bail, subject to appropriate terms and conditions. It reiterated that while trials must proceed, pre-trial incarceration for extended periods in cases without grave charges is unwarranted.

Comments (0)

Leave a Comment

   Can't Read ? Click    Refresh