Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Man for WhatsApp Post Hinting at Religious Targeting
Court pointed out that though the post didn’t name any religion, its “hidden message” implied bias behind brother’s arrest under illegal conversion case
The Allahabad High Court upholds FIR over Bijnor resident's WhatsApp message against arrest in illegal religious conversion case
The Allahabad High Court recently refused to quash an FIR lodged against Bijnor resident Afaq Ahmad for allegedly circulating an “inflammatory” WhatsApp message that, according to police, had the potential to disturb communal harmony following the arrest of his brother under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.
A division bench comprising Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava observed that though the petitioner’s message did not directly mention religion, its “unsaid words” conveyed a subtle message suggesting that his brother had been targeted because of his religious identity.
The court held that such communication, even if indirect, could arouse religious feelings among sections of the community and warranted investigation.
"It is certainly a message, which, by its unsaid words, is likely to create or promote feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between religious communities, where members of a particular community, in the first instance, could think that they are being targeted by members of another religious community by abusing the process of law," the order stated.
Chandpur police in Bijnor registered a case under Sections 299 and 353(3) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), 2023, on the complaint of Sub-Inspector Prashant Singh. The officer alleged that Afaq sent WhatsApp messages to multiple people in the town, expressing anger over his brother Arif’s arrest in a unlawful religious conversion case. Screenshots of the message were produced by a local resident, Ameer Azam, who told police he had received the message on July 23, 2025, which later auto-deleted.
The petitioner argued that the post merely conveyed frustration over his brother’s arrest and expressed faith in the judicial process. His counsel, Advocate Syed Shahnawaz Shah, contended that the FIR against Arif was with no names of alleged victims mentioned, and that Afaq’s message could not be construed as inflammatory. Shah alleged that the FIR against Afaq was an act of retaliation for his brother’s case and an attempt to malign their family.
Rejecting these arguments, the bench noted that even if the post was couched in restrained language, its underlying suggestion that the accused was targeted due to his religion carried communal undertones.
“The words of the post may not speak per se about religion, but they definitely convey an underlying message that his brother has been targeted in a false case because of belonging to a particular religious community,” the court observed.
Court added that such messages could create “feelings of enmity, hatred, and ill-will” between communities. It clarified that although the alleged act may not strictly fall under Section 353(3) of the BNS, it prima facie attracted Section 353(2), which penalizes acts promoting communal disharmony.
Stating that the case required a thorough investigation, the court refused to exercise its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution to quash the proceedings. “This is a matter which requires investigation and cannot be scuttled at an incipient stage,” the bench said, dismissing the writ petition.
Case Title: Afaq Ahmad vs. State of U.P. and others
Order Date: September 26, 2025
Bench: Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava