Tribal Hindu community pressured to convert to Christianity under guise of attending prayer meetings in Sehore
Sehore, Madhya Pradesh, India 
14 June, 2026
Case Summary
A Hindu tribal community, named the Barela community, became the target of coercive and organised religious conversion activities by Christian missionaries in Sehore district, Madhya Pradesh. The perpetrators carried out efforts to persuade and manipulate Hindu tribal families to abandon their traditional Hindu beliefs and adopt Christianity. The issue came to public attention after villagers confronted individuals involved in these activities during a late-night gathering in the district. The conversion activities were conducted through a series of meetings held in remote villages across Sehore district. These gatherings were organised under the guise of prayer meetings and social programmes and were used to influence members of the Hindu community to leave their traditional Hindu religious practices and embrace Christianity. Over time, conversions within sections of the tribal population increased, creating growing concern among Hindu families seeking to preserve their religious traditions, customs and cultural identity. The activities came under greater scrutiny in Bania village in the Rehti region of Sehore district. Mukesh Azad, district president of the Bhim Army, an anti-Hindu Ambedkarite political group, emerged as a perpetrator in the matter. His name repeatedly surfaced in connection with efforts to convert members of the Hindu community. The conversion campaign specifically focused on tribal Hindus and sought to encourage them to abandon their ancestral faith and adopt Christianity. The situation reached a turning point when local residents and Hindu activists arrived at a late-night gathering in Bania village after learning of ongoing conversion-related activities. Members of the Hindu community questioned those present about the purpose of the meeting and its connection to missionary efforts operating in the area. During the confrontation, villagers challenged the individuals involved regarding their attempts to convert local tribal Hindus. In response, Mukesh Azad openly defended the conversion activities and declared that such efforts would continue despite opposition from the local Hindu community. The confrontation subsequently escalated into a physical altercation between the two groups. Several individuals sustained injuries during the clash, and sticks and other objects were used during the violence. What began as resistance to conversion activities developed into a wider district-level dispute concerning the religious targeting of tribal Hindu communities. Following the incident, members of the Hindu community voiced concern over increasing missionary influence within tribal villages. Community members stated that sustained efforts were being made to persuade Hindu tribal families to abandon their traditional religious beliefs and convert to Christianity. Residents also pointed to visible religious and demographic changes within parts of the district and expressed concern regarding the long-term preservation of the community's Hindu religious and cultural identity. The incident also brought attention to the role of missionary networks operating in tribal areas. Local activists raised concerns regarding church-linked support systems and resources being utilised to facilitate conversions. Community members demanded a detailed investigation into the activities taking place within tribal villages and sought closer scrutiny of organisations involved in religious outreach programmes. Mukesh Azad and his associates denied involvement in conversion activities and claimed that they had been targeted during the confrontation. However, local Hindu residents continued to assert that the dispute originated from efforts to convert members of the Hindu community and from resistance by Hindu villagers determined to protect their traditional faith and customs. Following the clash, local authorities monitored the situation to prevent further escalation and maintain public order. Officials indicated that the circumstances surrounding the confrontation and the conversion-related activities would be examined. The incident drew attention across Sehore district and intensified public debate regarding religious conversion, missionary activities and the preservation of Hindu tribal identity among the Hindu community.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category - Predatory Proselytisation. Within this, the sub-category selected is - Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination. Under this the tertiary category selected is - Pattern of targeting Hindus. Religious brainwashing essentially means the often subtle and forcible indoctrination to induce someone to give up their religious beliefs to accept contrasting regimented ideas. Religious grooming or brainwashing also involves propaganda and manipulation. It involves the systematic effort, driven by religious malice and indoctrination, to persuade “non-believers’ to accept allegiance, command, or doctrine to and of a contrasting faith. Cases of such grooming or brainwashing are far more nuanced than direct threats, coercion, inducement and violence. In such cases, it is often seen that there is repeated, subtle and continual manipulation of the victim to induce disaffection towards their own faith and acceptance of the contrasting faith of the perpetrator. While subtle indoctrination is widely acknowledged as predatory, an element which is often understated in such conversions or the attempts of such conversion is the role of loyalty and trust which might develop between the perpetrator and the victim. Fiduciary relationships are often abused to affect such religious conversion. For example, an educator transmitting religious doctrine of a competing faith to a Hindu student. The Hindu student is likely to accept what the teacher is transmitting owing to existence of the fiduciary relationship. The exploitation of the fiduciary relationship to religiously indoctrinate victims would also be included in this category. Since the underlying animosity towards the victim’s faith forms the basis of predatory proselytization, such cases are considered religiously motivated hate crimes. The other primary category selected is: Attack not resulting in death. The subcategory selected is: Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save the victim. In several cases, Hindus are attacked for opposing religiously motivated crimes being committed against a fellow Hindu or simply for voicing an opinion opposing radical elements, who either have in the past or continue to persecute Hindus. In such cases, the initial attack against the victim, against which the Hindu was trying to defend the victim, would also need to be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime. Since the initial crime itself was religiously motivated and the subsequent crime of attempting to save the victim or speaking against the radical elements ends up inviting a violent attack, it would also be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime under this category. This case is a clear example of a religiously motivated hate crime because members of the Hindu community were deliberately targeted for conversion to Christianity through organised and deceptive methods. Prayer meetings, which ordinarily serve as voluntary gatherings for worship and spiritual reflection, were used as a façade to approach Hindu families and gradually persuade them to abandon their ancestral faith. The conversion campaign specifically focused on Hindus, demonstrating that the victims were selected on the basis of their religious identity rather than through ordinary social or religious engagement. Luring unsuspecting Hindus to prayer meetings under false pretences and exploiting those gatherings to carry out coercive conversion efforts made the entire operation inherently predatory in nature. The use of manipulation and deception as instruments of religious conversion constituted a form of religiously motivated hostility because it sought to undermine the beliefs, traditions and cultural identity of the Hindu community without informed and free consent. By disguising conversion efforts as prayer meetings and social programmes, the perpetrators exploited the trust and vulnerability of Hindu tribal families to influence their religious choices. Such targeted attempts to induce members of one religious community to renounce their faith and adopt another reflected discriminatory conduct directed at that community's religious identity, making the incident a clear example of a religiously motivated hate crime. The facts of this case also pointed to a sustained pattern of religiously motivated targeting rather than an isolated incident. Conversion meetings were organised repeatedly across several villages in Sehore district, where Hindu tribal families were approached under the guise of prayer meetings and social programmes and then subjected to persuasion and manipulation aimed at coercing them to abandon their ancestral faith and embrace Christianity. The repeated targeting of multiple Hindu families across different locations demonstrated that these activities were systematic and directed at a specific religious community. This pattern is a significant indicator of a religiously motivated hate crime because it reflects a coordinated effort to single out Hindus on the basis of their religious identity. By repeatedly employing deceptive methods and psychological influence to encourage conversion, the perpetrators sought to weaken the religious and cultural identity of vulnerable Hindu communities rather than engage in genuine voluntary religious discourse. The recurrence of such incidents across numerous locations indicated that the conversions formed part of a deliberate strategy to target Hindus collectively, exposing them to sustained pressure and manipulation. Such activities also had the potential to reduce the Hindu population within these localities and alter the demographic composition of the region over time. Taken together, these acts demonstrate a coordinated campaign rooted in hostility towards the Hindu community and directed at eroding its religious and cultural identity. The hostility in this case extended beyond coercive conversion efforts and culminated in violence against Hindus who sought to protect members of their own community from targeted religious conversion. When local Hindus confronted the Christian missionaries and opposed the ongoing conversion activities, they were met with physical aggression, resulting in a communal clash in which several individuals sustained injuries. The violence was directly linked to the Hindus' attempt to defend their fellow community members, preserve their ancestral faith and resist coercive conversion practices. Targeting Hindus for opposing the conversion of vulnerable members of their own community transformed the incident from a mere dispute into a religiously motivated attack, where individuals faced violence because they sought to safeguard the religious identity, traditions and cultural continuity of the Hindu community. Furthermore, the involvement of the district Bhim Army president heightened the gravity of the incident, suggesting that the conversion campaign extended beyond isolated individuals. His support indicated a more organised effort targeting the Hindu community, reinforcing concerns about the broader scale and coordinated nature of the activities. Here, it is important to state that while the Bhim Army presents itself as a champion of Dalit rights, its actions and affiliations often contradict this claim. Dalits are very much Hindus, yet the Bhim Army frequently targets Hindu symbols, festivals, and practices, including those held sacred by Dalits themselves. This pattern suggests that the organisation’s agenda is less about genuine Dalit upliftment and more aligned with broader anti-Hindu narratives that seek to divide and weaken Hindu society from within. This becomes particularly apparent when the Bhim Army aligns with leftist and Islamist platforms, where identity politics is weaponised against Hindus. In such spaces, the micro identities of caste, region, and language are secondary; what matters most is religious identity. It is the Hindu identity, regardless of caste, that often becomes the target of animosity. As seen in cases where Dalit families were attacked for displaying Hindu symbols or worshipping deities, the hostility stems not from caste differences, but from a disdain for Hindu religiosity. For example, on May 19, 2020, reports emerged in which a Dalit family in Bihar’s Kishanganj district accused the local Bhim Army unit of attacking them for their beliefs, desecrating a temple as they objected to their reverence for Hindu deities and saffron flags. Similarly, on June 29, 2021, in Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh, a Hindu named Saurabh Sharma was attacked by Bhim Army members over political differences. The assailants used swords and rods, causing severe injuries, and threatened to eliminate the Brahmin community from the area. Moreover, Bhim Army chief Chandrashekhar Azad has repeatedly made statements and taken positions that reflect his anti-Hindu stance. For instance, he has publicly endorsed conversion as a political weapon, invoking B.R. Ambedkar’s decision to leave Hinduism, and has actively supported movements that call for a rejection of Hindu festivals and practices. In fact, Chandrashekhar Azad's political trajectory has strongly focused on building a Dalit-Muslim alliance, a strategy that became particularly visible during his active participation in the anti-CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) protests that culminated in the Delhi anti-Hindu Riots 2020. His brand of politics, under the banner of Dalit-Muslim unity, has contributed to narratives that vilify Hindu traditions and exacerbate targeted attacks against Hindus. Thus, by attacking Hindu symbols and aligning with forces hostile to Hinduism at large, the Bhim Army effectively turns against the cultural and spiritual traditions of the Dalit community itself. In doing so, it reinforces the very forces of division and religious antagonism that marginalise Dalits, not as a caste, but as Hindus. This contradiction reveals that, despite its stated mission, the Bhim Army’s trajectory increasingly serves an anti-Hindu, rather than a pro-Dalit, agenda. Considering all these parameters, it remains apparent that the crime was rooted in hatred for the Hindu faith and community; therefore, it is being added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when a crime occurs rather than when it is reported in the media. However, in this case, the available media reports do not specify the exact date of the incident. Accordingly, the date on which the incident was published in the media, 15 June 2026, has been adopted as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes. While the district Bhim Army president has been specifically identified in this case and is included within the perpetrator count due to his support for and involvement in the conversion activities, the primary perpetrators were the Christian missionaries who carried out the conversion campaign. As the available reports do not specify the total number or identities of these Christian perpetrators, the perpetrator identity has been recorded as "Christian extremists", while the perpetrator count has been conservatively maintained as '1' for documentation purposes. This approach ensures that the principal nature of the offence is accurately reflected without overstating the number of identified perpetrators.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
