The Supreme Court on Friday quashed a religious conversion case lodged against the Vice-Chancellor (VC) of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences (SHUATS), Dr. Rajendra Bihari Lal..A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra passed the ruling in the case, which involved allegations that there were attempts to convert people to Christianity. The Court has quashed similar FIRs lodged against some officials working at the institute as well. The Court found that the person who filed the complaint against Dr. Lal was not competent to file such a complaint. .Notably, under Section 4 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, no stranger or third party can file a complaint. This restriction was removed by a 2024 amendment, making any person competent to file a complaint. However, the Court held that the 2024 amendment would not be applicable in this case. "We have looked at all angles. The UP Act scheme, whether FIR can be quashed if chargesheet filed...FIR 224/2022 suffers from an incurable legal defect lodged by a person not competent to do so as per the Act prevailing then. Thus FIR needs to be quashed and all criminal proceedings emanating is quashed .. FIRs 50 and 60 of 2022 is covered by TT Antony case and is quashed. Writ seeking quashing of FIR is maintainable. Thus the writs are maintainable and entertainable. Institution of the complaint and the quality of material gathered during course of investigation during FIR OF 54/2023 fails to inspire confidence and is quashed," the Court held today. .The Court in 2023 stayed the arrest of the SHUATS Vice-Chancellor in the case. Dr. Lal had moved the top for relief after the Allahabad High Court dismissed his anticipatory bail plea. In 2024, the Supreme Court granted him anticipatory bail. Anticipatory bail was also granted to three other officials/ professors working at the institute.Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave appeared for Dr. Lal before the Supreme Court and argued that the VC was being hounded..SHUATS, earlier known as Allahabad Agricultural University, is one of the prominent universities in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh.As per a first information report (FIR) of April 2022, around 90 people had gathered outside Evangelical Church of India, Hariharganj in Fatehpur District to convert to Christianity through coercion and undue influence.Upon interrogation, it was allegedly revealed by the pastor that the process of conversion had continued for 34 days and was to be completed in 40 days. It was alleged that they were also converting patients from the Mission Hospital in collusion with the employees.The investigating officers claimed 55 people were involved in the conversion racket. 35 were named and 20 were unknown.An FIR was registered under Sections 153A, 506, 420, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 3 read with 5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act 2021.Dr. Lal submitted that the FIR did not name him, but he was continuously harassed and intimidated by respondents belonging to Vishwa Hindu Parishad.Eight months after the FIR was registered, Dr. Lal was served notice under Section 41(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on December 26, 2022, asking him to appear before the investigating officer (IO) on December 29, 2022.Dr. Lal's plea before the top court said that he appeared before the IO on the said date and answered all queries."The petitioner had categorically stated that the petitioner along with the university has absolutely no concern with the said church and the said hospital and further, stated that he has no knowledge regarding the activities carried out at the said church and the hospital. Further it is pertinent to point out that Evangelical Church of India, Fatehpur is neither a member of the board of management, nor a member of the founding society of the university," the petition contended.Despite this, a raid was conducted in the university and a huge hue and cry was also made by the authorities in the media to tarnish the reputation of Dr. Lal and university, it was submitted.During hearings, Senior Advocate Dave had claimed that Dr. Lal was being charged on the basis of statements by a disgruntled employee and a rusticated student..[Read Judgment]
