The Supreme Court in the case Irfan Khan @ Irfan Shaikh vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh observed and has asked the Uttar Pradesh Anti-Terrorism Squad whether it was being necessary to continue that the custody of Irfan Shaikh who has been arrested over allegations made of illegally wherein converting persons to Islam. In the present case, Shaikh, a Central Government employee, is facing of the charges for conspiracy to wage war against India (Section 121A Indian Penal Code, 1860) and offences under the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of the Religion Act.
The bench headed by Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia observed and has asked the UP ATS if it was being necessary to continue his custody wherein considering that the agency has been having his custody for over a year. Therefore, the Shiakh has approached the Supreme Court after the bail has been refused by the Allahabad High Court. The counsel, Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan appearing for the accused submitted that it is not being that the conversation is banned and the said UP law does not apply anywhere. The person who is being convicted was inclined towards Islam on his own accord. Therefore, their statements are there and the said marriage happened in Delhi and they willingly converted.
I being only an interpreter. However, as per the charge sheet, a UP police A.T.S. got a piece of information that some anti-national or anti-social elements and religious organizations, on the dictate of ISI and foreign organizations, wherein having indulging in getting the peoples who converted in Islam by getting funds from the foreign countries for the said purpose. During the investigation, one Umar Gautam was being arrested for allegedly running a conversion racket. The appellant, Irfan Shaikh, who being working as an Interpreter in Sign Language Training and Research Centre, New Delhi, wherein alleged to be a vital link of this syndicate. Before the court, a charge sheet has been filed against Shaikh under Section 120B, Section 121A, Section 123, Section 153A, Section 153B, Section 295A, Section 298, Section 417 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3, Section 5, Section 8 of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, Act. Accordingly, the ASG sought two weeks’ time to respond.