The Supreme Court on January 2nd, Thursday, dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by an Islamic man seeking to expunge remarks made by a Bareilly court in a love jihad case. The court criticized the petitioner for attempting to sensationalize the issue.
As per OpIndia, the Bareilly Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court I), Ravi Kumar Diwakar, had described illegal religious conversions as a threat to the unity and sovereignty of Bharat in a verdict dated September 30, 2024. The judge also expressed concerns about foreign funding in such activities and warned of potential consequences if such practices are not curbed. The trial court had issued these observations while sentencing Mohammad Alim to life imprisonment for his involvement in a case of forced religious conversion.
Supreme Court’s stand
A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti rejected the PIL filed by petitioner Anas, who had claimed that the Bareilly court’s comments were against the Islamic community. The petitioner’s counsel, Advocate Manas P. Hameed, admitted that his client was not directly involved in the case.
Justice Roy criticized the petitioner, stating, “You are a busybody intervening in a matter that does not concern you.” Justice Bhatti questioned the basis of the plea, asking whether the Supreme Court could expunge remarks made by a lower court based on evidence. The bench clarified that observations made by a trial court cannot be removed under Article 32 of the Constitution, which is meant to address violations of fundamental rights.
The Supreme Court concluded that the petitioner had no standing to challenge the remarks and dismissed the PIL.
The Bareilly Court’s observations
As per Jagran, the Bareilly court sentenced Alim to life imprisonment for trapping a Hindu woman by posing as Anand, forcing her into a relationship, and pressuring her to convert. Alim’s father, Sabir, was also sentenced to two years in prison for his role in the crime. The court described the act as part of a larger international conspiracy to promote illegal conversions, comparing it to situations in Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Judge Ravi Kumar Diwakar emphasized that such activities threaten national unity and sovereignty, raising concerns about foreign funding supporting these practices.
Details of the case
The incident dates back to 2022 when Alim, pretending to be Anand, befriended a Hindu woman in Bareilly. He wore a kalawa (a sacred thread) and frequented temples to gain her trust. Alim eventually lured the victim into a relationship and, on March 13, 2022, performed a temple ritual to feign marriage.
Alim repeatedly sexually assaulted the woman, leading to her pregnancy. When she insisted on formalizing their marriage with her family’s consent, Alim refused and coerced her into an abortion.
In May 2023, the victim discovered Alim’s real identity when she visited his house. Confronting his family, she faced physical abuse and was pressured to convert to Islam for marriage. When she refused, the victim reported the matter to the police, who promptly arrested Alim and filed a charge sheet.
The Bareilly court held that Alim’s actions exemplified a calculated effort to exploit religious differences for personal gain. The court also highlighted the broader societal implications of such practices, labeling them as instruments of population manipulation and a threat to Bharat’s cultural integrity.
The case underscores the judiciary’s stance against illegal conversions and emphasizes the need to address such sensitive issues without sensationalism. Forced conversions driven by Islamist agendas pose a significant threat to Hindu communities, targeting their faith and freedom. Strong laws against forced conversions act as essential safeguards, but their effectiveness depends on strict enforcement and judicial efficiency.
