Allahabad High Court Denies ‘Shuats’ Vc, Director’s Anticipatory Bail Because “Their Intent Behind Charitable Activities Is Dubious”
The Vice Chancellor of the Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences (formerly Allahabad Agricultural Institute), Dr. Rajendra Bihari Lal, and the Director of the Institute, Vinod Bihari Lal, were both refused anticipatory bail by the Allahabad High Court on February 28 in relation to a case involving widespread religious conversion.
The bench of Justice Manju Rani Chauhan stated that they can’t claim parity with other people who have been released on anticipatory bail because they are a powerful person and their motives behind the charitable works appear to be questionable, affecting the interests of a marginalized section of society.
The bench observed that because the investigating agency had gathered material proof of mass conversion that has a significant impact on society as a whole, this case involves a serious offense and should not be taken lightly.
The Court further noted that the case against the applicants had expanded and gone beyond a straightforward application for anticipatory bail, as several first information reports from victims who had been persuaded by coercion or allurement had been filed while the current application was still pending.
In this regard, the Court stated categorically that it cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that tangible proof of the mass conversion of people has been gathered, and that the case has become much more serious as victims are coming forward to testify. If protection were to be granted, this would impede the investigation process.
The applicants were given interim protection while the plea was pending, with a requirement that they appear before the investigating officer. The applicants, however, disobeyed the court’s orders, and their non-appearance, the court added, shows that they have no intention of cooperating in the investigation.
A defense for the candidates
The FIR, in this case, was filed last year in April in response to a complaint made by a man named Himanshu Dixit. He claimed that about 90 people of the Hindu religion had gathered at the Evangelical Church of India in Hariharganj, Fatehpur, with the intention of forcing them to become Christians through coercion, undue influence, and the promise of easy money, among other tactics.
The government officials arrived at the scene after getting this information and questioned the pastor, Vijay Massiah, who allegedly admitted that the conversion process had been ongoing for 34 days and was expected to be finished in 40 days.
He reportedly also stated that the staff members actively participate in efforts to convert patients who have been admitted to the Mission Hospital. As a result, government officials discovered 20 unidentified individuals and 35 individuals (named in the F.I.R.) who were involved in the conversion of 90 members of the Hindu community to Christianity.
Sections 153A, 506, 420, 467, and 468 I.P.C. and Section 3/5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act were used to file the Complaint.
The current applicant was not named in the FIR, but he was later accused of being biased against the applicant based on comments made by two interested witnesses and the case’s investigating officer.
Currently, the applicants are arguing in court that they are not named in the FIR, that the crime is not serious in nature, and that they are respectable people. However, they claim that despite this, they are being used to implicate him in the crime and that he is being victimized for reasons that are best known to the parties involved.
Additionally, they claimed that they were not mentioned in the Complaint. They cannot be excused based solely on the fact that they were not named in the initial information report, the Court noted in rejecting this claim.
The Court further noted that the applicants were aware of the offense because they had received a notice under Section 41(1) Cr.P.C., to which a response had been provided, and because the action had been taken to remand some individuals under the applicable Sections after gathering pertinent evidence.
The Court also pointed out that although the applicants were required to assist with the inquiry, they have evaded capture ever since, leading to the issuance of non-bailable warrants on 04.2.2023.
News Mania Desk
