MP court grants bail to Bishop, nun in religious conversion case

MP high court has granted bail to an archbishop and a ser of an orphanage in a religious conversion case noting that the “complaint of conversion” can be regered only a person who is related blood, marriage or adoption, guardianship or custodianship and no one else. The decision has come as a major setback to the National Commission of Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), who took cognizance of the matter and got the complaint regered. Madhya Pradesh high court (File Photo) Archbishop Jerald Alameda, 77, and ser Lily Joseph were arrested after NCPCR chairman Priyank Kanoongo visited the hostel in Katni and filed a complaint of conversion them after a Bible was found in the possession of students. The court also directed Asha Kiran Institute, Katni, which is regered under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, shall not provide religious education to orphans or children admitted therein. They are required to provide education as defined in Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, the court said. Also Read: MCOCA court rejects under-trial prisoner’s plea for shoes, belt inside jail A single bench of judge Vishal Dhagat said, “The state government to see that religious education is not imparted in shelter homes to children but they are imparted modern education, as laid down in Section 53 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. As per Section 53, the state is free to take action in accordance with the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, against Asha Kiran Care Institute if there is a violation of Section 53 and sectarian education is provided to children.” The court further stated, “Police officer shall not inquire or investigate a complaint under Section 3 of MP Freedom of Religion Act, 2021 unless the said complaint is written a person aggrieved, who has been converted or attempt has been made for his conversion or the person who are parents or siblings or with leave of the Court any person who is related blood, marriage or adoption, guardianship or custodianship, as may be applicable.” Without naming anyone, the court order read, “In the present case, the complaint has been lodged an individual who conducted the inspection. No complaint has been made the person converted or the person aggrieved or against whom an attempt was made for conversion or their relatives or blood relatives. In the absence of such written complaint, police do not have any jurisdiction to inquire or investigate into offence committed under Section 3 of Act of 2021.” In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, the anticipatory bail application filed the applicants is allowed, read the high court order. This is the fourth case when anticipatory bail was granted MP high court even as NCPCR took cognizance of the incidents. Reacting to it, NCPCR chairperson Priyank Kanoongo said, “The state government advocates failed to present the case. It is the duty of the NCPCR to raise the matter of orphans kid. The state government didn’t inform NCPCR about the bail application. We should be informed so that the matter could be presented in a better way. It’s a setback for the state government not for us.”