Uttarakhand anti-conversion law fails in court, 62 cases and no convictions since 2018

The anti-conversion law enacted by the BJP government in Uttarakhand in 2018 with the aim of preventing conversion from the Hindu community has reportedly fallen short of convictions in court, as records show that of the 62 cases filed under the UFRA, only five were subjected to full trial, though all of the accused were acquitted due to the prosecution’s failure to prove force, undue influence, coercion or allurement.

An investigation by The Indian Express, based on records obtained through 30 Right to Information applications, shows that although arrests under the UFRA have continued and the law has been progressively tightened, judicial scrutiny has repeatedly undermined the state’s claims, with courts frequently pointing to evidentiary gaps, contradictions in witness statements and procedural lapses.

Of the 62 cases registered until last month, court records for 51 cases across 13 districts indicate that only five reached the stage of full trial, while at least seven were dismissed mid-way after complainants turned hostile or the prosecution failed to corroborate allegations.

In the remaining cases where the status is known, a substantial majority of the accused are out on bail, with 11 securing relief from the Uttarakhand High Court and one from the Supreme Court, while bail has been denied in only three cases and hearings are pending in several others, according to The Indian Express.

In multiple orders, courts have noted consensual relationships, inconsistencies between FIRs and later statements, or non-compliance with statutory procedure, all of which weakened the prosecution’s case at the threshold stage.

The acquittals that have already been recorded illustrate recurring patterns. In two cases initiated by third parties rather than allegedly aggrieved persons or their immediate family, courts found that the complaints did not meet the legal requirements of the Act and that no inducement or coercion had been proved.

One such case related to online videos allegedly critical of Hinduism and the caste system, where digital evidence failed scrutiny and no material proof of inducement emerged, leading the court to reaffirm the constitutional freedom to profess and propagate religion within legal limits.

Another acquittal involved allegations of mass conversion against a pastor and his wife, where the prosecution could not establish when or how any individual had been induced to convert, despite claims of targeting vulnerable communities.

Other cases collapsed after alleged victims retracted or modified their statements during cross-examination, including matters where charges of rape, kidnapping and forced conversion were added later to missing person complaints.

Court records further show that in a significant number of ongoing trials where the UFRA has been invoked alongside serious criminal charges, judges have recorded findings that the couples involved were in consensual relationships or that the evidence did not support claims of deception or coercion.

In several such cases, bail was granted after courts noted that statements before magistrates were missing, electronic evidence was absent, or prior applications under the Special Marriage Act contradicted allegations of concealment of identity.

The law itself has undergone successive amendments, first in 2022 and again in 2025, enhancing penalties and making bail more difficult, although the latest amendment is yet to be notified after being returned by the Governor for corrections. Despite this tightening, the rising number of cases, particularly after 2022, has not translated into convictions, raising questions about enforcement and evidentiary standards.