A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra passed the verdict while allowing the appeal by Rajendra Bihari Lal and Vinod Bihari Lal, the vice-chancellor and director of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology & Sciences (SHUATS). The accused had challenged Allahabad High Court's refusal to quash the criminal cases filed against them in 2022 under the state's anti-conversion law and the IPC. The top court said merely organising religious events or engaging in charitable activities did not amount to a criminal offence either under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, or the IPC. Moreover, the complainant, a VHP activist, was not an "aggrieved person" as defined under Section 4 of the Act, the top court added. Under Section 4 of the unamended Act, the aggrieved person can only be a relative of the person converted. The law was amended in 2024 to give any individual the right to lodge a complaint against conversion. The apex court noted that the FIR in the present case was lodged before the amendment, making the complaint invalid. "The forensic report provided by respondent no. 1 (UP government) provides details about the materials seized by the investigating authorities from the possession of a few of the accused persons, including mobile phones, hard disks, etc. Most of the videos and images are descriptions of the activities and drives conducted by an organisation by the name World Vision," Justice Pardiwala, who authored the judgment, observed. "Pertinently, no material is directly linked to the incident alleged in FIR No. 224/2022. Moreover, we do not find from a reading of the UP Conversion Act that organisation of religious gatherings or doing charity work in the name of religion has also been made a criminal offence," he added. He said no provision in the IPC prohibited such activities. "No irregularity in the funding of the organisation from international sources has been pointed out. More so, in case of any such irregularity, a number of provisions of the relevant legislation could have been invoked to deal with an erring organisation. However, no such provisions have been invoked in the present case. Receiving foreign aid and carrying out charitable work, even in the name of religion, ipso facto is not a punishable offence under any of the legislations," he said. The bench said the impugned FIR not only suffered from an incurable legal defect, but also the materials collected during the probe lacked credibility and fell short of the standard necessary to permit criminal prosecution. "The criminal law cannot be allowed to be made a tool of harassment of innocent persons, allowing prosecuting agencies to initiate prosecution at their whims and fancy, on the basis of completely incredulous material," the bench said while quashing the six FIRs registered in the case.