High Court quashes anti-conversion FIR over pamphlets near Jamkhandi temple
Police registered an anti-conversion case after three men distributed religious pamphlets and preached near a temple in Jamkhandi. The Karnataka High Court quashed the FIR and trial court proceedings. The Court held a third-party complainant had no standing and no specific conversion or attempt was alleged.
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 FIR and proceedings before the Jamkhandi court stand quashed.
What happened
LawBeat reported that on May 4, 2025 three men were found distributing religious pamphlets and preaching near the Ramatheerth Temple in Jamkhandi. A temple visitor complained they denounced other beliefs, claimed their mission was to spread their faith, and allegedly offered jobs and material benefits.
The High Court held the FIR was legally invalid because the complainant was an unrelated third party. Citizens for Justice and Peace reported the Court held only a converted person or close family, as listed in Section 4 of the 2022 Act, could complain.
The High Court held that even taking the FIR at face value, it did not show a concrete act of conversion or attempted conversion of any identifiable person. LawBeat reported the Court said preaching without coercion, allurement, fraud or misrepresentation does not attract the anti-conversion provisions.
The High Court quashed the FIR and all related proceedings before the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Jamkhandi.
What the record says
“There is no allegation that the petitioners converted or attempted to convert any person to another religion,”
[name withheld] and Others vs State and Another, Karnataka High Court order dated July 17, 2025, as reproduced by LawBeat — read the full text
Punished for a freedom
The state prosecuted men for preaching and distributing pamphlets, with no identified converted person or complaining victim, which is propagation of religion without harm to anyone.
What we could not confirm
Case number not printed in the reports consulted. District left null because only Jamkhandi is named on the pages opened. The FIR used the language of allurement, but the Court found no identifiable target or victim and no concrete attempt.