The counsel for appellants argued that false allegations regarding allurement and undue influence for mass conversion were made against them. The appellants maintained that they were only providing free treatment to patients in a hospital, which cannot be said to be a temptation for mass conversion.
It was submitted that the appellants were not involved in any activity of religious conversion or any attempt at religious conversion, either directly or by misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion, allurement or fraud.
The accused-appellants were only providing good teachings, distributing copies of Bible, encouraging children to get education, organizing assemblies of villagers and performing “Bhandara” and doing other good work which cannot be termed as allurement, the counsel argued.
The appellants also relied on statements of villagers recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), as per which the villagers said that the appellants used to give them good teaching, distribute Bibles and encourage them to get their children educated.
Pertinently, it was contended that the complainant was neither an aggrieved person nor the parent, brother, sister or any other person, related by blood, marriage or adoption to an aggrieved person as provided for under Section 4 of the Act.
It was submitted that the complainant being the Zila Mantri of a ruling party, lodged the FIR to gain political goodwill although he was not competent to lodge the FIR under the Act.
Source: Barandbench
