E-Paper
Allahabad HC orders to pay ₹50K to man jailed in false anti-conversion case
HC imposes ₹75K cost on state; says petition is a glaring example of the State Authorities falling and scrambling over each other in order to score brownie points
LUCKNOW Quashing an FIR registered under the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, against five persons accused of luring a Hindu woman to get converted, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court has imposed a cost of ₹75,000 on the state.
The court slammed the police action as “vexatious” and ordered the authorities to pay of ₹50,000 to one of the men (petitioner Ubaid Kha) who had to spend one-and-a-half months in jail. It added that apathy shown by the authorities has compelled the court to award the cost. The court ordered to deposit the remaining ₹25,000 with the Legal Aid Services of the court.
Ordering immediate release of Ubaid Kha, the court said, “This petition is a glaring example of the State Authorities falling and scrambling over each other in order to score brownie points on the basis of the FIR which has been lodged by the respondent no.4.”
The order was passed by a division bench of Justice Abdul Moin and Justice Babita Rani on October 30, 2025, on a petition filed by Umed aka Ubaid Kha and others. The petitioners sought directives to quash the FIR lodged against them with Matera police station of Bahraich district, under Section 140 (1) the BNS and also sought a stay on their arrest.
“... after the FIR had been lodged on 13.09.2025, the petitioner No.1 was arrested on 18.09.2025 and the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 on 19.09.2025 totally falsifying the FIR yet the respondents authorities did not deem it fit to take any corrective action for release of the petitioner No.1 and he continues to languish in jail since a period of one and a half months and is still in jail... ,” the court observed.
The case stems from an FIR lodged by Bahraich resident Pankaj Kumar whose wife went missing from home with jewellery and cash on September 13. Kumar approached the police and said five men, named by him in the FIR, had lured his wife away. Police booked the men under Sections of the anti-conversion law and charged them with abduction.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite the woman recording a statement saying that she had fled on her own because of abuse, his client was not freed. The court allowed the state to proceed against the erring officials and Kumar for registering a false case. With this order and observation, the court allowed the petition.
