Prayagraj: The Allahabad high court has granted bail to a Tamil Nadu resident in a case involving alleged unlawful religious conversion in Mirzapur district of Uttar Pradesh. According to police, Dev Sahayam Deniyal Raj, a resident of Tenkasi district, was the leader of a gang which had allegedly converted 70 people and was planning to convert 500 more when he was arrested in Sept last year.
In its order dated Jan 28, Justice Ashutosh Srivastava allowed his bail application. Deniyal and co-accused Paras had been in jail since Sept 30, 2025. They were booked under sections 3 and 5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. According to the version of UP Police, the gang used to lure poor and tribal people to convert to Christianity by offering them “healing prayer meetings” and “financial help”. During the course of hearing, Deniyal’s counsel submitted that he was innocent and falsely implicated. The FIR in the case had been lodged at the instance of one Indrasan Singh, who is neither an “aggrieved individual nor a relative or an immediate family member” of the “aggrieved individual” and, as such, the initiation of prosecution on the basis of the alleged FIR is unsustainable. It was also contended that nothing incriminating had been recovered from the possession of the applicants. On the other hand, the state counsel opposed the bail petition. However, the high court said that without commenting on the merit of the case, a case for bail was made out and granted bail to the applicant. During the course of hearing, Deniyal’s counsel submitted that he was innocent and falsely implicated. The FIR in the case had been lodged at the instance of one Indrasan Singh, who is neither an “aggrieved individual nor a relative or an immediate family member” of the “aggrieved individual” and, as such, the initiation of prosecution on the basis of the alleged FIR is unsustainable. They relied on the Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Rajendra Bihari Lal and another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others 2025 (SC) 1021, wherein it was held that as per the statutory scheme of the unamended section 4 of the 2021 Act, the initiation of prosecution for the alleged offence of illegal religious conversion stands circumscribed and may be set in motion only at the behest of the aggrieved individual or in the alternative, by his or her immediate family members or blood relatives.It was also contended that nothing incriminating had been recovered from the possession of the applicants. On the other hand, the state counsel opposed the bail petition. However, the high court said that without commenting on the merit of the case, a case for bail was made out and granted bail to the applicant.
