Several people face prosecution under Jharkhand religion law in Shikaripara case
A 2018 Shikaripara police case led to prosecution under Section 295A of the IPC with Section 4 of the Jharkhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2017, sanctioned by Dumka authorities. The accused asked the High Court to end the proceedings. On 22.08.2024 the court allowed an amendment to their plea, issued notice, and kept the case pending.
This page records what the cited court records and reports say happened. Findings belong to the court or authority that made them; this register adds none of its own. Names of private individuals are withheld unless a naming gate clears them.
How we verify →The petition to end the religion-law prosecution remains pending after the 22.08.2024 order allowing amendment and issuing notice.
What happened
The High Court recorded a challenge to the proceedings in Shikaripara P.S. case no. 52 of 2018, which invoked Sections 295A of the IPC with Section 4 of the Jharkhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2017.
The court record cites prosecution sanction through Memo no. 720 / Legal, Dumka dated 22.10.2018, which places the sanctioning authority in Dumka district.
On 22.08.2024 the court allowed the petitioners to amend their plea, directed issue of notice to the opposite party, made the rule returnable within six weeks, and deferred listing until the service report arrived.
The order decides no merits and grants no acquittal or discharge; the prosecution and the petition to end it both remain pending.
What the record says
“Issue notice to the Opposite Party no. 2. Rule is made returnable within six weeks.”
[name withheld] matter, order No. 05 / 22.08.2024 — read the full text
Punished for a freedom
The recorded charges are insult-to-religion and conversion provisions with no violence, sexual-offence, fraud or minor-related provisions alongside; facing prosecution under the conversion law for belief or preaching restricts religious freedom.
What we could not confirm
The order excerpt gives no narrative of the underlying incident, so the exact religious act and exact incident date could not be confirmed; qualification rests on the charged provisions, which list no violence, sexual-offence, fraud or minor-related sections; whether any complainant alleged force or allurement is not visible in the excerpt.