CLAIM BY ANY RELIGION OF BEING THE SOLE TRUE RELIGION IS WRONG: ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT:

The Allahabad High Court has held that it is wrong for any religion to claim that it is the only true religion, as such a claim implies a disparagement of other faiths and can hurt religious sentiments. The Court observed that statements asserting the exclusivity of one religion, particularly when made in public prayer meetings, may attract the provisions of Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code if they are made with deliberate and malicious intent to outrage the religious feelings of any class of citizens.

A Single Bench of Justice Saurabh Srivastava passed the order while dismissing an application filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) by Reverend Father Vineet Vincent Pereira, a Christian priest. The applicant had sought quashing of the chargesheet, the cognisance order, and the entire criminal proceedings initiated against him under Section 295-A IPC. The case was registered on the basis of an FIR alleging that during a prayer meeting, the priest repeatedly stated that Christianity is the only true religion, thereby hurting the religious sentiments of the Hindu community.

The applicant contended that he had been falsely implicated in the case. He submitted that he had never indulged in any illegal conversion of religion, particularly among the marginalised sections of society, nor had he spoken against any other religion. It was further argued that the Investigating Officer had itself concluded in the chargesheet that no illegal conversion had taken place. Despite these submissions, the High Court found no merit in the plea for quashing the proceedings.

The Bench carefully examined the contents of the FIR, which alleged that the applicant, during his prayer meetings, frequently asserted that there is only one true religion, Christianity and that such statements had hurt the sentiments of Hindus. The Court observed that India is a secular nation where people of all faiths live together with mutual respect. In this constitutional framework, it is impermissible for any religion to claim superiority or exclusivity by declaring itself as the only true faith, as such assertions tend to disparage and insult other religions.

Referring to Section 295-A IPC, the Court explained that the provision penalises deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class of citizens by insulting their religion or religious beliefs. The Bench held that the statements attributed to the applicant in the prayer meetings prima facie fell within the ambit of this section. The Court noted that at the stage of taking cognisance or considering a quashing petition, the Magistrate is only required to form a prima facie opinion based on the material available on record. The Court is not expected to conduct a mini-trial or examine the defence of the accused in detail. All the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant related to disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by the High Court while exercising its limited jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS.

The Bench emphasised that the power under Section 528 BNSS is extraordinary and should be exercised sparingly. Since the FIR and the material collected during investigation disclosed a prima facie case under Section 295-A IPC, interference by the High Court at this stage was not warranted. The Court accordingly dismissed the application, holding that the proceedings against the applicant could continue before the trial court.

This judgment reiterates the constitutional value of secularism and the need for religious harmony in a diverse country like India. It makes it clear that while every citizen has the right to practise and propagate his or her religion, this freedom does not extend to making public assertions that denigrate or insult other faiths. The decision serves as a reminder that religious discourse must be conducted with sensitivity and respect for the beliefs of others, particularly in a secular democracy where all religions are entitled to equal respect and protection under the law.