Fake FIRs Under UP Anti-Conversion Law: Allahabad HC’s Stern Rebuke
Court Flags “Disturbing Trend” of Baseless Cases
Orders State to Ensure Security for Victim and Petitioners
By Our Legal Correspondent
New Delhi: April 16, 2026:
Analytical Overview
The Allahabad High Court has sharply criticized the misuse of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, highlighting a disturbing trend of false FIRs filed under pressure. The Court has ordered top state officials to explain their actions and granted protection to an interfaith couple.
In disputes involving wills, probate proceedings, and testamentary succession, courts have consistently emphasized the importance of proving genuineness and the right to seek probate. A landmark ruling in this area is Krishna Kumar Birla vs. Rajendra Singh Lodha and Others , where the Supreme Court examined critical issues relating to probate rights and locus standi in will disputes. This judgment is highly relevant for understanding who can challenge or support a will under Indian law.
The Court’s recent order underscores the tension between individual rights and state policing under the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The case involved an interfaith couple where the woman, aged 18, categorically denied allegations of forced conversion or marriage. Despite her statement, the Investigating Officer (IO) continued to pursue charges under kidnapping, assault, and the anti-conversion law.
Key Legal Provisions Discussed
- Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021
- Prohibits conversion by misrepresentation, coercion, undue influence, allurement, or marriage.
- Requires prior approval from the District Magistrate for conversion.
- Provides penalties for violations, including imprisonment.
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023
- Section 69 (rape) was initially invoked but later dropped.
- Charges of kidnapping and assault were retained despite the victim’s denial.
- Victim’s Statement under Section 183 BNSS
- Legally binding testimony recorded before a magistrate.
- The victim affirmed her consensual relationship and rejected allegations of conversion or coercion.
Court’s Observations
- FIRs are being filed “left and right” under the 2021 Act, often turning out to be false.
- IOs appear to act under external pressure, raising concerns about impartiality.
- The Supreme Court had earlier flagged similar misuse in Rajendra Bihari Lal vs State of U.P. (2025).
- The complainant (victim’s father) was summoned to explain why action should not be taken against him for filing a false FIR.
- The Additional Chief Secretary (Home) must file an affidavit by May 19, 2026, detailing steps taken against such misuse.
Immediate Relief
- Arrest of petitioners stayed.
- State ordered to provide security to the couple and their families within three days.
[RESEARCH RESOURCES]
The Supreme Court of India has developed a consistent framework for determining the validity of wills, focusing on proper execution, attestation, and removal of suspicious circumstances. To explore these legal principles in detail, refer to this comprehensive guide on landmark Supreme Court judgments on wills and probate , which compiles the most authoritative rulings in Indian succession law.
BUY & READ BOOK, WILL WRITING SIMPLIFIED, By Dr Ravinder Kumar Anand. [📘 Buy Will Writing Simplified online: Amazon | Flipkart ]
FAQ: Understanding the Legal Issues
Q1. What is the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021?
It is a law aimed at preventing forced or fraudulent religious conversions. It criminalizes conversion through coercion, inducement, or marriage without prior approval from authorities.
Q2. Why did the Allahabad HC criticize the FIRs?
Because many FIRs under this Act are filed without evidence, often by third parties, and later proven false. The Court noted that such misuse undermines justice and individual freedoms.
Q3. What role did the victim’s statement play?
Her statement under Section 183 BNSS confirmed a consensual relationship and denied forced conversion. This should have led to closure of the case, but the IO persisted under questionable motives.
Q4. What precedent did the Supreme Court set?
In Rajendra Bihari Lal vs State of U.P. (2025), the Supreme Court highlighted the misuse of the anti-conversion law, warning against frivolous FIRs filed by outsiders.
Q5. What action can be taken against false FIRs?
The Court indicated that complainants who lodge false FIRs may face legal consequences, including prosecution for filing frivolous cases.
Q6. How does this case affect interfaith couples?
It reinforces judicial protection for consensual interfaith relationships, ensuring that misuse of the law does not infringe upon personal liberty.
Q7. What happens next?
The UP government must submit an affidavit by May 19, 2026. Failure to do so will require the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) to appear personally before the Court.
Key Takeaways
- Judicial vigilance is crucial to prevent misuse of sensitive laws.
- Victim testimony remains central in determining the legitimacy of charges.
- State accountability is being enforced through mandatory affidavits.
- The ruling strengthens individual rights in interfaith relationships against societal and political pressures.
This judgment is a significant reminder that laws meant to protect citizens must not become tools of harassment. The Allahabad High Court’s intervention sets a strong precedent for safeguarding liberty while demanding accountability from law enforcement.