HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9636 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicants, the Learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No. 351 of 2026, under Sections 3,5(1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, Police Station- Jiyanpur, District -Azamgarh, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as the applicants apprehend their arrest in the above-mentioned case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant no. 1 is an old man aged about 65 years, the applicant no. 2 is his son and the co-accused Sonu Kumar is son-in-law of the applicant no. 1. The applicants are practicing Hindus by religion and the allegation against them is of trying to induce poor men and women belonging to the Hindu religion and converting them to Christianity. The co-accused Sonu Kumar has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No. 9617 of 2026. The applicants have no criminal history. 4. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and has submitted that the applicants and the other accused are the primary accused in the present case. They had promised money and other temporal benefits to induce the weaker sections of the society to convert to Christianity. The offense is quite grave and applicants may not be considered for grant of anticipatory bail. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on the record. 7. The applicants claim to be professing Hindu. The fact that the applicants are Hindus have not been denied. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. The applicant no. 1 is aged about 65 years and the applicant no. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Awadhesh Kumar, Sanju Lata Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Avinash Kumar And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 2 is his son. The co-accused Sonu Kumar is the son-in-law of applicant no. 1. In view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, as appearing from the FIR, the nature and the gravity of the allegations made in the FIR, in the prima facie opinion of the Court, false implication of the applicants cannot be ruled out. 8. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail. 9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. 10. In the event of the arrest of the applicants -Avinash Kumar and Vikki Kumar Urf Atendra Kumar, they shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the following conditions:- i. the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; iv. that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 12. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case. September 30, 2026 Sartaj NABAIL No. 9636 of 2026 2 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SARTAJ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad