The Allahabad High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a student accused in a case registered under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The court observed that apart from the victim’s statement, there was no material on record at this stage showing the applicant’s direct involvement.
Background of the Case
According to the prosecution, an FIR was lodged on January 22, 2026, at Bilari Police Station in Moradabad district against five named persons under Sections 3 and 5(1) of the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act. The complaint was filed by the brother of a minor girl.
The FIR alleged that the minor victim had been “brainwashed” and pressured to change her religion. It was also alleged that she had once been forcibly made to wear a burqa and was continuously influenced for religious conversion.
Counsel appearing for the applicant argued that she was falsely implicated and was merely a co-student of the victim. The defence further pointed out that the principal allegations were against another accused, Aleena, who had already been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate bench of the High Court. The applicant also claimed to have no criminal history and expressed willingness to cooperate with the investigation.
Opposing the bail plea, the State and the informant relied on the victim’s statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). They submitted that the victim had spoken about being pressured and influenced regarding religious conversion.
However, the court noted that the applicant had no criminal antecedents and observed that there was “nothing on record other than the statement of victim” to indicate her involvement in the alleged offence.
Referring to Supreme Court rulings on anticipatory bail, including Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia, Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre, and Sushila Aggarwal, the bench said courts must consider factors such as the gravity of accusations, criminal history, possibility of false implication, need for custodial interrogation, and likelihood of the accused cooperating with the investigation.
“The Court, while considering the gravity of accusation, explained criminal history and apprehension of arrest… is of considered view to grant anticipatory bail,” the bench observed.
Justice Avnish Saxena directed that the applicant, Malishka @ Malishka Fatma, be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹25,000 along with two sureties of the like amount.
The court imposed several conditions, including cooperation with the investigation, non-interference with witnesses or evidence, and mandatory appearance before the trial court on key hearing dates.
It also clarified that the observations made in the order were limited to deciding the bail application and would not affect the merits of the trial.
Case Details
Case Title: Malishka @ Malishka Fatma vs State of U.P. and Another
Judge: Justice Avnish Saxena
Decision Date: May 4, 2026
