Evicted From Shared Flat Due to Religious Conversion — Legal Remedies Under Indian Law

One of my clients recently had a case which I am explaining below and if you are stuck in such similar situation, here is what to do.

Note: Due to attorney-client privilege, I cannot disclose complete case details or identify the actual parties involved. However, I am sharing the essential facts and legal approach so that if you find yourself in a similar situation, you can understand the available solutions and legal remedies.

Arjun Mehta, a young man from Lucknow, had been living in a shared flat in Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, with four flatmates for nearly two years. The arrangement had always been cordial — shared groceries, mutual respect, occasional late-night chai. That changed in early March 2025, when his flatmates discovered he had converted to a different faith.

What followed was swift and ugly. A family member of one flatmate arrived at the flat and spent hours pressing Arjun to reverse his decision. When he refused, he was given 24 hours to vacate — despite having paid that month's rent in full. During that confrontation, he was accused, without a shred of evidence, of being influenced by a terror-linked organisation and of receiving money from external sources.

After he left, Arjun discovered a group chat on a messaging platform. The primary flatmate had openly stated that the eviction was purely because of Arjun's religious conversion. Slurs were used. Other members had participated. Worse, the defamation didn't stop there — this person began contacting mutual friends in Lucknow and beyond, spreading fabricated accounts of Arjun's character and conduct.

Arjun initially tried to move on. But the targeted campaign continued to escalate. A friend connected him to our office in late March 2025, and we took up the matter. An earlier informal complaint Arjun had attempted without legal representation had gone nowhere. Once we structured the approach — preserving digital evidence, identifying the applicable offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and filing a formal complaint — the matter moved decisively in his favour. Handling matters involving hate speech, religious discrimination, and digital defamation simultaneously requires a specific understanding of how these threads interact legally, and a general approach often misses critical procedural steps.

Advice in Such Cases

Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation to come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.

Preserve all digital evidence immediately: Screenshots, timestamps, group chat exports, voice recordings — don't delete anything. Store copies on cloud as well as a physical device. Courts treat digital evidence under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, and proper preservation matters from day one.

Don't engage the opposite party directly: Avoid confronting the flatmates, sending angry messages, or making public posts. Anything you say can be used to complicate your own case or paint you as an aggressor.

Cases involving religious discrimination, hate speech, and online defamation together are procedurally complex. They require an advocate who regularly handles matters under Sections 196, 302, and 356 BNS — not simply someone familiar with general criminal law. Domain-specific experience directly affects how evidence is framed, which sections are invoked, and how quickly police and courts respond.

Applicable Sections of Law

• Section 196 BNS (formerly Section 153A IPC): Promotes enmity between groups on grounds of religion — directly applicable to hate speech and slurs documented in the group chat.
• Section 302 BNS (formerly Section 499/500 IPC): Defamation — covers the deliberate spreading of false statements harming reputation, both in the group chat and to third parties.
• Section 356 BNS (formerly Section 504 IPC): Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace — relevant to the slurs and accusations made during and after eviction.
• Section 316 BNS read with Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Section 108: Wrongful eviction without due process, despite existing tenancy and payment of rent — a tenant can't be evicted without notice or court order regardless of personal beliefs.

Punishment and Penalties

• Section 196 BNS: Imprisonment up to three years, or fine, or both. Cognizable, non-bailable, non-compoundable.
• Section 302 BNS (Defamation): Simple imprisonment up to two years, or fine, or both. Non-cognizable, bailable, compoundable with the permission of the court.
• Section 356 BNS: Imprisonment up to two years, or fine, or both. Non-cognizable, bailable, compoundable.
• Where multiple sections apply together — as in this matter — the cumulative gravity of the offences significantly affects bail and investigation priority. Make no mistake, Section 196 BNS is the serious anchor of this case.

Jurisdiction — Where to File the Case

For criminal complaints under Section 196 BNS, jurisdiction lies with the police station within whose territorial limits the offending acts occurred — here, the area police station covering Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, where the eviction and confrontation took place. For the continuing defamation via the messaging platform and direct outreach, jurisdiction can also be claimed at the place where the victim received the communication, as held in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, 2015. The complaint is cognizable under Section 196 and is filed before the jurisdictional Magistrate for non-cognizable parts. Territorial jurisdiction matters because an incorrectly filed complaint can be returned or transferred, costing critical time.

What if Police Refuse to File FIR?

Refusal to register an FIR for a cognizable offence is itself actionable. Here's what to do:

• Make a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) BNSS, requesting that the FIR be registered.
• If the SP doesn't act within a reasonable period, file a private complaint directly before the Judicial Magistrate First Class under Section 175(3) BNSS.
• The Magistrate, on taking cognizance, can direct the police to register the FIR and investigate.
• As a last resort, approach the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of mandamus directing registration of the FIR. The Supreme Court confirmed this power in Lalita Kumari v. Government of UP, 2014 — police cannot refuse to register an FIR for a cognizable offence.

Rights of the Accused

And here's the thing — understanding the rights of the accused is equally important, because knowing these rights protects everyone in the process:

• Right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution — no person can be compelled to be a witness against themselves.
• Right to legal representation under Article 22 and as affirmed in Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, 1979.
• Right to be produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest under Section 58 BNSS.
• Right to know the grounds of arrest and to receive a copy of the FIR under Section 47 BNSS.
• Right to have a chosen advocate present during interrogation under Section 56 BNSS.

Bail Provisions

Section 196 BNS is non-bailable — meaning bail isn't a matter of right and must be applied for before the Magistrate or Sessions Court. Regular bail under Section 480 BNSS can be sought once arrested. Anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS is available where there's apprehension of arrest, and frankly, it's advisable to apply for this early if the accused anticipates action. Typical bail conditions include surrendering passport, not leaving the jurisdiction without permission, reporting to the police station periodically, and refraining from contact with witnesses. So the bail strategy here is to move quickly, given the non-bailable nature of the primary section.

Quashing of FIR / Case

Now, before you consider this option — quashing is a remedy available to the accused, not the complainant. Under Section 528 BNSS, the High Court has inherent power to quash an FIR where no prima facie offence is made out, where the FIR is an abuse of the legal process, or where the parties have genuinely compounded a compoundable offence. In this matter, Section 196 BNS is non-compoundable, which substantially limits the viability of quashing on compromise grounds. Quashing is viable here only if the accused can demonstrate that the materials on record, even taken at face value, disclose no cognizable offence — a difficult standard given the documented screenshots and witness accounts.

If You Are the Victim

• File a written complaint at the jurisdictional police station and insist on an acknowledgement in writing — don't leave without it.
• Preserve all digital evidence: export the group chat with timestamps, save screenshots to multiple locations, and have at least two witnesses who can confirm the existence of the chat.
• Collect statements from people who were contacted and misled by the defamatory campaign — their accounts are secondary evidence of the ongoing harm.
• Apply for rent refund or recovery through the civil court or Rent Tribunal if the security deposit or advance rent has been withheld following the wrongful eviction.
• Track every new instance of defamation with date, platform, and recipient — the pattern of escalation strengthens the case considerably.

Documents You Must Keep Ready

• Aadhaar card and PAN card of the victim
• Rent agreement or any written communication confirming tenancy arrangement
• Rent payment receipts or bank transfer records showing payment for the relevant month
• Exported screenshots of the group chat with visible timestamps and sender details
• Names and contact details of witnesses who received defamatory communications
• Written statements or affidavits from those witnesses
• Any voice or video recordings of the confrontation at the flat, if available
• Records of any prior informal complaint made to the landlord or police, including dates

What Evidence Is Required?

• Primary digital evidence: The group chat screenshots with timestamps — this is the strongest item and must be preserved in original, unedited form.
• Secondary witness evidence: Statements from mutual contacts who were approached with defamatory narratives — they establish both the reach and the intent.
• Documentary evidence of tenancy: Rent receipts and agreement proving the victim had a lawful right to occupy the premises.
• Oral testimony of the victim: A detailed, chronological account of events from the confrontation to eviction to ongoing defamation.
• Expert evidence on digital authenticity: A forensic examiner's certificate under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 may be required to establish that the screenshots have not been tampered with.
• Circumstantial evidence: The timing and pattern of defamatory contacts — occurring specifically after the religious conversion became known — establishes motive.

How the Police Behave in Such Cases

Hesitant. That's the word I'd use. Cases involving religious hate speech often get reluctant initial responses from local police, particularly where the accused are from a dominant community in that locality. Officers may attempt to treat it as a "personal dispute" and push for informal settlement. Non-cognizable sections like defamation may be used as a reason to avoid registering an FIR. But Section 196 BNS is cognizable — police have no legal discretion to refuse registration on that count, as the Supreme Court made clear in Lalita Kumari v. Government of UP, 2014. Persistence through a written complaint and, if necessary, direct approach to the SP is essential.

Timeline of Legal Process

• Week 1-2: File written complaint at jurisdictional police station; if refused, approach SP under Section 173(4) BNSS.
• Week 2-4: FIR registration; police begin investigation; victim's statement recorded.
• Month 1-3: Investigation including forensic examination of digital evidence, witness statements.
• Month 3-6: Chargesheet filed before Magistrate; court takes cognizance.
• Month 6-12: Charges framed against accused; trial commences.
• Year 1-3: Evidence stage — examination and cross-examination of witnesses.
• Year 2-4: Arguments, judgment by trial court.
• Post-judgment: Appeal to Sessions Court or High Court if required.

How Long Will the Investigation Take?

For offences under Section 196 BNS, the police are expected to file a chargesheet within 60 days of arrest under Section 193 BNSS, failing which default bail becomes available to the accused. Where no arrest is made, investigation timelines stretch to three to six months in practice. Digital evidence examination through the state forensic laboratory can itself take four to eight weeks. And frankly, prompt and persistent follow-up by your advocate with the investigating officer isn't optional — it's non-negotiable.

Understanding the Costs

The total cost of a matter like this varies significantly from one case to the next — it depends on the complexity of the dispute, the forum involved, the number of hearings, and the specific facts of your situation. There is no single fixed figure that applies to everyone.

A professional advocate can give you an accurate estimate only after reviewing all your facts and documents in a consultation.

Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India