The Karnataka High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against three Muslim men who were accused of distributing Islamic pamphlets and making derogatory remarks near a Hindu temple, ruling that preaching religious beliefs does not in itself constitute an offence under the anti-conversion law unless accompanied by an actual or attempted conversion.
The FIR, filed in May 2025 at Jamkhandi Rural Police Station, named Mustafa Murtujasab Momin, Alisab Shabbir Alagundi, and Suleman Riyaz Galagali. The complainant, Ramesh Mallappa Navi, a local barber, alleged that the three men were distributing pamphlets promoting Islam near the Ramatheerth Temple in Jamkhandi. He further claimed they made statements such as, “If you continue to stay as Hindu, you will not be able to find God. There is no God except Allah, and all other gods are Kafir.”
According to the FIR, the men also declared their mission was to “make the whole world turn towards Islam” and threatened that “we will not spare your lives” if anyone obstructed them. It was also alleged they offered material inducements, including vehicles and jobs in Dubai, to encourage conversion.
The men were booked under sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for inciting enmity and criminal intimidation, as well as Section 5 of the Karnataka Protection of Right to Freedom of Religion Act, 2022, which penalizes unlawful religious conversions through force, fraud, or allurement.
However, Justice Venkatesh Naik T, delivering the order on 17 July 2025, ruled that the complaint was legally untenable because it was filed by a third party who lacked legal standing under the statute. Under Section 4 of the Act, only the converted person, their immediate family, or close relatives are authorized to file such a complaint.
“The complaint was lodged by a third party, who does not fall within the category of persons enumerated under Section 4 of the Act. Therefore, registration of FIR by [such a] respondent, who lacks locus-standi, is legally invalid,” the Court observed.
The judge also held that even assuming the allegations were true, the legal threshold for criminal prosecution was not met. He stated, “Even if the allegations in the FIR are accepted at its face value, it fails to satisfy the essential elements of an offence under Section 3 of the Act. There is no allegation that the petitioners converted or attempted to convert any person to another religion.”
The Court emphasized that while the anti-conversion law prohibits conversion through force, fraud, or allurement, it does not criminalize the mere expression or dissemination of religious beliefs, absent a credible attempt to convert someone.
“The absence of these essential elements renders the allegations insufficient to constitute an offence under the Act. Consequently, the registration of the FIR, culminating in the filing of the charge sheet, is vitiated,” the order concluded.
The petitioners were represented by Advocates Iftekhar Shahpuri and Anwarali D. Nadaf, while the State was represented by Advocate Abhishek Malipatil.
This ruling reinforces the legal distinction between proselytization and forced conversion and underscores the requirement of legal standing and substantive evidence before invoking anti-conversion laws.
(With inputs from Law Chakra)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
