Can NCPCR Intervene in Child Conversion Cases? Supreme Court Leaves the Question Open Under MP Freedom of Religion Act

The Supreme Court of India has recently deliberated on whether the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has the legal authority to file complaints under the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021regarding unlawful conversions of children. The case stems from an investigation conducted by Priyank Kanangoo, Chairman of the NCPCR, into the Asha Kiran Institute, a Catholic-run shelter home in Katni District, Madhya Pradesh. The inspection allegedly revealed that Hindu children at the institute were coerced into reading the Bible and attending church services.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that NCPCR does not have the locus standi to file such complaints since the Act mandates that only the affected person or their relatives can do so. However, the Supreme Court expressed reservations about this view, stating that the question remains open for future legal determination.

Key Facts and Proceedings in the Case

• Date: February 15, 2025
• Issue at Hand: Whether the NCPCR can lodge complaints under the MP Freedom of Religion Act, 2021, regarding religious conversions of children.
• Court’s Stand: The Supreme Court did not make a final ruling on NCPCR’s authority but stated that the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s view should not be treated as precedent.

Background of the Case

• Inspection by NCPCR Chairman:
  • Conducted at Asha Kiran Institute, a Catholic-run shelter home in Katni District, Madhya Pradesh.
  • Allegation: Hindu children were forced to read the Bible and attend church services.
• FIR Registration:
  • Filed under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
  • Also registered under Sections 3 and 5 of the MP Freedom of Religion Act, 2021 for alleged forced religious conversion.
• Legal Challenge:
  • The Bishop of the Roman Catholic Church, Diocese of Jabalpur, and a nun from Asha Kiran Institutechallenged the FIR.
  • Argument: The complaint was invalid as no affected person or relative had filed it.

Madhya Pradesh High Court’s Ruling

• Anticipatory bail was granted to the Catholic Archbishop and the nun.
• Key Legal Reasoning:
  • The MP Freedom of Religion Act, 2021, states that only the converted person or their family members(parents, siblings, or legal guardians) can file a complaint.
  • Since the NCPCR Chairman was not personally affected, the police had no jurisdiction to investigate the case.
• High Court’s Observation (Paragraph 8 of the Judgment):
  • “Police Officer shall not inquire or investigate a complaint under Section 3 of M.P. Freedom of Religion Act, 2021 unless said complaint is a written complaint by a person aggrieved, who has been converted or attempt has been made for his conversion or by persons who are parents or siblings or with leave of the Court by any person who is related by blood, marriage or adoption, guardianship or custodianship, as may be applicable.”

Supreme Court’s Observations

• The Supreme Court refused to interfere with the High Court’s bail order as the accused had already been granted regular bail by the trial court.
• However, it expressed concerns about the High Court’s interpretation regarding NCPCR’s role.
• Supreme Court’s Statement on NCPCR’s Authority:
  • “…upon consideration of the provisions of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 assigning the role of parens patriae to the NCPCR qua children in distress as well as the 2015 Act and the 2021 Act, we have our reservations with regard to what has been expressed by the High Court in paragraph 8 of the impugned judgment and order.”
  • “We, therefore, observe that the observations made in paragraph 8 shall not be treated to be precedent for deciding future cases and the question of locus standi of the NCPCR to lodge a complaint in an appropriate case, upon following the due procedure laid down therefor, is kept open.”
• Court’s Doubts on NCPCR’s Locus Standi:
  • “Section 4 of the MP Freedom of Religion Act says the complaint has to be by the person who was converted. Where did NCPCR get the locus? The MP Act is very clear - complaint by them, his parents, his siblings, blood relatives, etc. So, the Act is very clear.”

Ongoing Legal Questions

• The Supreme Court has not made a final decision on whether NCPCR can file complaints under the MP Freedom of Religion Act.
• The issue remains open for future legal interpretation.
• Implication: Future cases may reconsider whether child protection agencies like NCPCR can take action against unlawful religious conversions involving minors.

Case Details: THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. JERALD ALAMEDA AND ANR.|SLP(Crl) No. 6321/2023 and NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR PROTECTION OF CHILD RIGHTS (NCPCR) v. JERALD ALAMEDA AND ORS| SLP(Crl) No. 10143/2023

Attachment: