The Court granted anticipatory bail to Malishka alias Malishka Fatma, accused under Sections 3 and 5(1) of the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, after noting that apart from the victim’s statement, there was no material on record showing her involvement.
Allahabad High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail In Alleged Religious Conversion Pressure Case
The Allahabad High Court on Monday granted anticipatory bail to a school student accused of allegedly brainwashing a minor girl, forcing her to wear a burka and pressuring her to convert to Islam.
Justice Avnish Saxena granted relief to the accused, Malishka alias Malishka Fatma, who is stated to be a major.
FIR Alleged Pressure To Convert Religion
Police booked the accused under Sections 3 and 5(1) of the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act.
The victim’s brother filed the FIR. He alleged that the accused and four others brainwashed the minor girl to force her to convert her religion.
According to the FIR, the accused allegedly made the victim wear a burka on December 20, 2025, and repeatedly pressured her to change her religion.
State Opposed Bail Plea
The State opposed the anticipatory bail application.
The Additional Government Advocate told the Court that authorities had already recorded the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
The State argued that the victim’s statement clearly showed that the accused had pressured and brainwashed her for religious conversion.
On the delay in filing the FIR, the State submitted that the victim remained under the influence of the accused for some time. The prosecution argued that the informant discovered the alleged acts only after making considerable efforts.
Defence Claimed No Similar Allegations
Counsel for the accused argued that the applicant studied in the school before the victim joined.
The defence also said that no other complaint accused the applicant of pressuring any girl to convert religion.
The counsel further informed the Court that the main allegations targeted co-accused Aleena. A coordinate Bench of the High Court had already granted anticipatory bail to her.
Informant Relied On Earlier High Court Order
Counsel for the informant referred to a recent Division Bench order of the High Court.
In that case, the High Court refused to quash the FIR while hearing a petition filed by another co-accused.
Court Examined Anticipatory Bail Principles
Before granting relief, the Court discussed the legal principles governing anticipatory bail.
The Bench said courts must consider several factors before granting protection from arrest. These include the seriousness of the allegations, criminal history of the accused, possibility of false implication, need for custodial interrogation, willingness to cooperate with investigation, conduct of the accused and risk of absconding.
The Court noted that the applicant had no criminal antecedents.
The Bench also observed that, apart from the victim’s statement, the prosecution had not produced any other material linking the applicant to the alleged offence.
The Court considered the nature of the accusations, absence of criminal history, low flight risk and the applicant’s assurance to cooperate with the investigation and trial.
Based on these factors, the High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant.
