The Allahabad High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a Class 12 Muslim student accused of attempting to forcibly convert her Hindu classmate, noting that there was limited evidence against her beyond the complainant’s statement.
Justice Avnish Saxena, in an order dated May 4, observed that “there is nothing on record” apart from the alleged victim’s statement to establish the involvement of the accused, identified as Malishka alias Malishka Fatma.
The court also took into account that the student has no prior criminal record.
“The applicant shall appear before the trial court or investigating officer within 30 days and be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of ₹25,000 with two sureties,” the court directed.
Allegations in the Case
The case was registered under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 following a complaint filed by the Hindu student’s brother.
He alleged that a group of Muslim girls at a tuition centre tried to pressure his sister into accepting Islam. According to the complaint, the girl was allegedly made to wear a burqa and encouraged to consume non-vegetarian food during an outing in December 2025.
In her statement to the police, the student claimed she was forced to wear the burqa and was urged to adopt the religious practices of the accused.
Accused Claim Case is Retaliatory
The accused students have denied the allegations, claiming the case was filed as retaliation. They alleged that the complainant had been harassing one of the Muslim girls, and the FIR was lodged after a complaint was made against him.
Earlier, some of the co-accused had approached the High Court seeking to quash the case. However, a division bench declined to do so and allowed the investigation to continue.
Court’s Earlier Observations
While refusing to quash the case in April, the court had remarked that allegations of forced religious conversion among young students were “disturbing” and required proper examination.
At the same time, the latest bail order indicates that the court found insufficient material at this stage to justify custodial action against the accused student.
