The petitioners had submitted that “nature of investigation is absolutely misconceived and misdirected and, therefore, registration of FIR of an offence against the present applicants right from the inception is erroneous” as Section 3A of the 2021 Act invoked in the FIR could not apply to the incident of alleged conversion that took place in the year 2016 and 2018 as there were no complaints against the accused during that time.
One of the petitioners, a Priest (Maulvi) also submitted that the “only material against him till date is the fact that he has imparted education to four to five children of already converted people and that there is no material against him.”
The petitioners had also contended that as per Section 6 previous sanction from District Magistrate before prosecution was mandatory and not acquired by the Bharuch district police. The court order said the Additional Advocate General Mitesh Amin had placed on record the order dated July 25, 2022, passed by the District Magistrate, Bharuch whereby sanction was granted to prosecute the accused persons. The court also noted the submission of the Additional AG that the sanction “would come only after filing of the chargesheet and not for the registration of the offence.” The court held it was for the petitioners to “raise the question of the validity of the sanction at the time of the trial” as there was no “reason to interfere with the ongoing trial”.
Referring to the petition of Abdul Adam Patel alias Fefdawala Haji, a UK national, who is native of Nabipur in Bharuch and accused of providing financial assistance for the religious conversion in the case, the HC noted that he had not “shown any willingness to cooperate in the investigation” and “chosen not to remain present…” Stating that the court found no reason to entertain his plea, the order noted that Fefadwala had visited India 25 times before the registration of FIR.
At least 16 persons had been booked in the FIR until April 2022, under Indian Penal Code Sections 152(B)(C)(assertions prejudicial to national interest, 153(A)(1) (Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony), 295(A) (Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings) as well as 120(B) (criminal conspiracy).
The court order states the observations of the HC are “tentative in nature” and the trial court hearing the case “may not be influenced” by the observations.
Source: The Indian Express
DISCLAIMER:
Persecution Relief wishes to withhold personal information to protect the victims of Christian Persecution, hence names and places have been changed. Please know that the content and the presentation of views are the personal opinion of the persons involved and do not reflect those of Persecution Relief. Persecution Relief assumes no responsibility or liability for the same. All Media Articles posted on our website, are not edited by Persecution Relief and is reproduced as generated on the respective website. The views expressed are the Authors/Websites own. If you wish to acquire more information, please email us at: persecutionrelief@gmail.com or reach us on WhatsApp: +91 9993200020