Allahabad HC Awards ₹25 Lakh Compensation to Two Sisters Kept in Illegal Confinement After Converting to Islam
By Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate
PHAGWARA: The Allahabad High Court has held that parental disapproval of an adult child's religious choice cannot justify curtailing their liberty, and has ordered the father of two sisters and the Uttar Pradesh government to jointly pay ₹25 lakh in constitutional compensation for their unlawful confinement.
The significant ruling was delivered on August 6, 2026, by Justice Sandeep Jain in *Kunwar Sultan Ali and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others*, Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 1079 of 2026. The court declared sisters Diya Bhatia, also known as Zoya Diya Bhatia, and Anshu Bhatia, also known as Amina Anshu Bhatia, free to live wherever and with whomever they chose.
The habeas corpus petition had sought the production and release of the two women. Following an earlier court direction, the sisters were produced before the court on July 30, 2026, by police officials.
During her interaction with the court, Anshu Bhatia, aged about 35, said she was highly educated, holding M.Sc., M.Phil. and B.Ed. degrees, and had worked as a lecturer. She told the court that she had voluntarily embraced Islam in 2020, saying the decision was based on her conscience, spiritual beliefs and desire for mental peace.
She categorically stated that her conversion was not the result of force, fraud, coercion, inducement or undue influence. According to her statement, her father, Anil Kumar Bhatia, opposed her decision and attempted to persuade her to return to Hinduism.
The court was told that following her conversion, she was allegedly confined at the parental home against her wishes and subjected to physical restraint, intimidation and mental harassment to compel her to renounce Islam.
The second sister, Diya Bhatia, aged about 20, also told the court that she had voluntarily embraced Islam in 2021 on account of her personal faith, conscience and spiritual beliefs. She too denied having been subjected to force, fraud, coercion or allurement.
The High Court emphasised that once a person attains majority, parents and family members cannot dictate their personal choices. It held that parental authority must yield to constitutional liberty and individual autonomy.
“Neither parents nor other family members can arrogate to themselves the authority to dictate the personal choices of a major individual,” the court observed, adding that any restraint on the liberty of an adult, except under lawful authority, amounts to illegal confinement.
Also Read:Sensational crime thwarted: Foreign based gangster's operative held with pistol in Bathinda
The court found that the sisters had been confined against their will because of their decision to adopt a faith different from that of their family. It held the confinement to be a violation of their fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 25 of the Constitution, which protect personal liberty and freedom of conscience and religion.
The court also criticised the State authorities for failing to secure the women's release and allowing their confinement to continue under the cover of criminal proceedings arising from Case Crime No. 228 of 2025.
Describing the violation as grave and prolonged, the court said the sisters had suffered mental anguish, emotional trauma, psychological suffering and social isolation. It held that constitutional compensation was warranted as a public-law remedy for violation of fundamental rights.
The court accordingly held the father and the State of Uttar Pradesh jointly and severally liable and directed payment of ₹25 lakh, to be equally divided between the two sisters, within eight weeks.
The State was given liberty to recover 50 per cent of the amount from the father and the remaining 50 per cent from any delinquent public servant responsible for the unconstitutional deprivation of liberty, in accordance with law.
The father was also directed not to interfere with the sisters' liberty, movement, residence, profession or religious choices. Authorities were ordered to ensure their safety and peaceful life. The court further directed that their passports, educational certificates, identity documents, bank records, conversion-related documents and other personal belongings be handed over to them.
The court clarified, however, that its observations were confined to the issue of illegal detention and did not determine the merits of the pending criminal proceedings or the legality of the alleged religious conversions.
In reaching its conclusion on compensation, the High Court relied upon Supreme Court precedents including *Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar* and *Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa*, which recognise monetary compensation as a public-law remedy for serious violations of Article 21.
The judgment reinforces the constitutional principle that an adult's liberty and freedom of conscience cannot be subordinated to parental disapproval, social pressure or religious considerations.
If you want, I can also turn this into a **stronger investigative/news-analysis version for Punjab News Express**, with a sharper headline, SEO headline, sub-headline and keywords.
What's Your Reaction?
Like
0
Dislike
0
Love
0
Funny
0
Angry
0
Sad
0
Wow
0
