New Delhi: The Centre has presented data from eight states to the Supreme Court to counter a plea alleging rising attacks on Christians across India, arguing that such pleas seek to portray an inaccurate picture and are often used to project the country as dangerous for Christians in the international community.
The Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) stated in a compliance affidavit that most of the incidents listed by the petitioner(s) (263 out of 495) were not reported to the concerned state governments.
Out of the 232 incidents that were reported, 73 were resolved amicably through mutual agreement between the parties, and these were related to issues such as land disputes, family disputes, superstitious practices, violation of Covid-19 guidelines, and other trivial matters, it said.
In the remaining 155 cases, FIR/non-FIR complaints were registered.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, and advocate Sumeer Sodhi, representing the Chhattisgarh government, opposed the arguments made by senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, who represented the petitioners, before a bench headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud.
Mehta alleged that the petitioners wanted to keep the situation contentious. He further claimed that some incidents had been falsely portrayed and most of the incidents listed never occurred, and the government was concerned that this would be used to project an image of danger to Christians outside the country. Mehta also noted that there had been 64 arrests in Chhattisgarh.
In response, Gonsalves argued that the issue was not about arrests, but rather about the attacks on Christians. He urged the court to review the data and make an informed decision.
According to the Centre, the petitioners claimed 38 incidents of attacks on Christians in Bihar, but the state government only reported 15 incidents. Out of these, five were resolved amicably, 12 accused were arrested, and charge sheets were filed in two cases.
Similarly, in Chhattisgarh, the petitioners claimed 119 incidents, but the state government reported only 36 incidents. Out of these, 12 were related to family disputes and were resolved amicably, while 64 accused were arrested and charge sheets were filed in 13 cases.
In Uttar Pradesh, the petitioners claimed 150 incidents, but the state government only reported 70 incidents. The affidavit stated that 44 FIRs were registered, 72 accused were arrested, and 33 were served notices under section 41-A of CrPC. Charge sheets were filed in 30 cases.
In summary, the Centre provided data on the incidents reported by the state governments in response to the petitioners' claims of attacks on Christians in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, and Uttar Pradesh. It also noted the number of cases that were resolved amicably and the number of accused who were arrested and charged.
During the hearing, Mehta, stressing petitioners' data on the number of attacks on Christians is incorrect, submitted that in Bihar, petitioners claimed 38 incidents, but these were fights between neighbours where one happens to be a Christian, and fights were resolved and whenever there is a grave offence, arrests have happened.
Mehta also questioned the data from the helpline referred by the petitioners, on which whoever reported an incident was counted.
After hearing submissions, the bench also comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and J.B. Pardiwala, noted that the counsel for petitioners says MHA's affidavit was received last night and time should be granted to the petitioners to file a response if needed, and listed the matter for further hearing after three weeks. The petition has been filed by Most Rev. Dr Peter Machado and others.
The MHA's affidavit said that it is evident from the information furnished by the concerned state governments that the counsel for the petitioners has exaggerated the number of incidents and many incidents alleged as Christian persecution in the report of the counsel for the petitioners may have been either false or wrongly projected.
"It is submitted that many trivial disputes between two parties are likely to have been given religious colour. For example - in relation to an incident in the district of Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh, the Counsel for the petitioner(s) in their report, has claimed that the police barged in and disrupted the prayer of pastor Prem Singh and warned the pastor to discontinue their services as well as detained the pastor. However, the verification report of the government of Uttar Pradesh reveals that there is a land dispute between pastor Prem Singh and a local resident, named Vijay Kumar. Police action in the matter was projected as persecution of Christians. The matter was deliberately given religious colour," said the affidavit.
The affidavit further added that in reference to 'Christians Under Attack in India' -- a fact-finding report prepared by the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR), the UCF, and United Against Hate (UAH), the verification reports received from concerned state governments thereof reveals that many allegations and observations made in the report were found to be unfounded and the majority of the incidents quoted either were false or deliberately exaggerated, and uncorroborated.
"The incidents, quoted here, from the UCF, PR (Persecution Relief) and EFI/ RLC's (Evangelical Fellowship of India- Religious Liberty Commissions) reports were based on the alleged calls on their helpline and social media sites and the said organisation have no mechanism to corroborate the incidents reported to them over the helpline or their websites," it added.
The MHA said India is a vibrant pluralistic society founded on strong democratic principles and practices and the Indian Constitution guarantees fundamental rights to all citizens, including the Right to Freedom of Religion under Articles 25 to 28 of the Constitution, and all persons have an equal rights to practice, profess and propagate their religion peacefully.
The affidavit said the attempt of the petitioners is to paint a particularly false picture for aims unknown and it is submitted that the country is governed by the rule of law and the attempt of the petitioners is to create a false narrative through the present Article 32 petition must be deprecated.
"It is submitted that the present petition is an attempt to short-circuit the process of law followed by the entire country that ought to be stalled. Therefore, in view of the aforementioned, it is denied that there is any violation of fundamental rights as enshrined under the Constitution of India, as alleged. It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the petition may be dismissed," said the affidavit.
With IANS Input