Religious Conversion: SC Stays Criminal Proceedings against Christian Missionary

The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the criminal proceedings pending in a Madhya Pradesh trial court against Christian missionary Ajai Lall.

The case involves alleged forced conversion of two foster children and their parents to Christianity.

Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, passed the stay order, effective until the matter is finally disposed of by the Supreme Court.

During the hearing, CJI questioned the applicability of the offence of human trafficking (Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code), noting the absence of such an allegation in the case. The petitioner is facing charges under Sections 370 and 186 of the IPC, along with S. 3 and 5 of the M.P. Dharmik Swantrata Adhiniyam, 2021 (M.P. Act, 2021), and S. 42 and 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. The petitioner has challenged the MP High Court’s decision to not quash the case.

The criminal case originated from a complaint by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) following a viral video in which a woman claimed that she, her husband, and children were coerced to convert to Christianity in exchange for money. The petitioner allegedly harassed them when they stopped attending church.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the petitioner, highlighted that despite the State’s undertaking not to pursue the trial until January 5, 2024, the trial court continued the proceedings. Sibal argued for the transfer of the trial to another court.

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, representing the State, agreed with Sibal, stating that the trial judge should not have proceeded despite the State’s commitment. Mehta assured the Supreme Court that the State would inform the trial judge not to proceed until the Supreme Court decides the matter.

The CJI, referring to a previous order, clarified that the State had committed to not pursuing the trial until January 5, 2024. Sibal pointed out that the trial court misinterpreted the Supreme Court’s order, leading to confusion. The SG explained that the misinterpretation arose from the petitioner’s claim that the Supreme Court had stayed the proceedings.

To eliminate further confusion, the CJI ordered a stay on the trial, emphasizing that the trial judge was under a misapprehension regarding the true intent of the Supreme Court’s order.

In the concluding part of the hearing, the CJI questioned the basis for a charge of human trafficking under Section 370 of the IPC, stating that it was not the ex facie allegation. The SG responded that there are other contentions to address and emphasized the seriousness of dealing with children in this matter.