Tribal Hindus in Raipur pressured to convert to Christianity; Hindu deities denigrated and prayer meetings used to advance conversion efforts
Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India 
23 June, 2026
Case Summary
In Manth village, located in the Kharora police station area of Raipur, Chhattisgarh, several tribal Hindus were targeted for forced religious conversion by a Christian pastor, Sushant Gyani, and his associate, Piyush Patel. The accused also insulted Hindu deities and Hindu religious beliefs while attempting to force Hindu villagers to embrace Christianity and attend prayer meetings. According to the complaint filed by Hemant Maravi, Arun Kumar Uike and Rakesh Kumar Uike, Pastor Sushant Gyani of Raipur and his associate, Piyush Patel, had been visiting the tribal neighbourhood of the village for some time. During their visits, they pressured Hindus to convert to Christianity, accept Jesus Christ and attend Christian prayer meetings. The complainants stated that the two men also made objectionable remarks about Hindu deities and Hindu religious beliefs, hurting the religious sentiments of the villagers. The villagers stated that they had repeatedly opposed the activities of the accused and had warned them not to conduct religious conversion activities in the village or pressure anyone to change their faith. Despite these objections, the two men continued to visit the tribal neighbourhood and persisted in encouraging villagers to accept Jesus Christ, attend Christian prayer meetings and convert to Christianity. On 24 June 2026, at around 7:00 p.m., Pastor Sushant Gyani and Piyush Patel again visited the village, gathered tribal Hindus and urged them to pray, accept Christianity and embrace Jesus Christ. Their actions led to a confrontation after the villagers protested against the conversion drive. On the same day, a Christian prayer meeting was also being held at the residence of Lokesh Netam in the tribal neighbourhood, which further angered the villagers. The complainants stated that such activities had been conducted regularly in the village, creating social and religious tension. Upon receiving information about the dispute, the Kharora Police reached the spot. Later on 24 June 2026, the villagers reached Kharora Police Station late at night and submitted a written complaint against the accused. After investigating the complaint and the facts established during the inquiry, the police registered a case against Pastor Sushant Gyani and Piyush Patel under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Freedom of Religion Act and the relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code. Both accused were arrested, and the Kharora Police initiated further action against them while continuing the investigation. Raipur Rural Superintendent of Police Shweta Shrivastava Sinha confirmed the arrests of the accused and said, "This case does not fall under the Vidhan Sabha police station area, but rather the Kharora police station area. The accused were illegally facilitating religious conversion in this case. Upon investigation, the crime was found to be valid, following which the accused have been arrested and produced before the court. Sections of the Religious Freedom Act have been applied in this case, which are non-bailable."
Why it is Hate Crime ?
In this case, the primary category selected is: Predatory Proselytisation. The subcategory selected is: Harassment, threats, coercion for conversion Harassment covers a wide range of behaviours of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behaviour that demeans, humiliates, and intimidates a person, including threats and coercion. Harassment and threats, in this case, find their root on discriminatory grounds which has the effect of nullifying a person’s rights or infringing upon his freedom to exercise his right specifically owing to the victim’s religious identity. Verbal and physical threats and psychological or physical harassment are often used against Hindu victims because they choose to practice their professed religion. Religious harassment also includes forced and involuntary conversions by harassment, threats or coercion. Coercion includes intimidatory tactics like force-feeding a Hindu victim beef to convert to another religion, forceful circumcision etc. In several cases documented, non-Hindu perpetrators or those who harbour specific animosity towards Hinduism, harass victims simply based on their religious identity. Such cases often also include harassment to ensure the Hindu victim abandons his/her professed religion and adopts the religion of the perpetrator. Such cases where Hindu victims are harassed to convert to the perpetrator’s religion are rooted in animosity towards the victim’s religious identity and are therefore documented as religiously motivated hate crimes. The other subcategory selected is: Attempting to convert/converting by denigrating Hinduism. In several cases, Hindus are converted or an attempt is made to convert Hindus by denigrating their faith, Hinduism. In such cases, the Hindus associate with the non-Hindu perpetrators often by choice and then, the attempt to convert them by insulting their faith, showing the faith down etc begins. An example of this would be a non-Hindu gathering where the Hindus are attending the gathering of their own free will. However, once they attend the gathering, there is an explicit attempt to convert them by abusing their faith and hailing the faith of the perpetrator. The denigration of the Hindu faith is often based on misrepresentation of the Hindu faith, its doctrine and scriptures and insult to espoused traditions if not blatant lies about Hindu beliefs and ways. Such conversions or attempts at conversions are driven by animosity towards the Hindu faith and are therefore documented as religiously motivated hate crimes. The other subcategory selected is: Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination. 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. This case was a clear example of a religiously motivated hate crime, as tribal Hindu villagers were subjected to sustained pressure to convert to Christianity while their Hindu deities and Hindu religious beliefs were denigrated during the conversion attempts. The victims were also repeatedly encouraged to attend Christian prayer meetings as part of these efforts. Taken together, these actions demonstrated an attempt to persuade members of the Hindu community to abandon their faith through sustained religious pressure and disparagement of their beliefs, making the incident a clear instance of a religiously motivated hate crime targeting Hindus. Firstly, religious conversion that does not arise from an individual's free and informed conviction, but instead results from sustained external persuasion, coercion or pressure, constitutes a violation of the victim's religious autonomy and fundamental right to profess, practise and retain their chosen faith. In this case, the perpetrators repeatedly visited the village and persistently pressured tribal Hindu villagers to convert to Christianity. Such conduct, undertaken through coercion and sustained pressure, sought to deprive the victims of their freedom to continue practising Hinduism. The repeated attempts to compel Hindus to abandon their faith also reflected a perception that the victims' existing religious identity was inferior, unacceptable or in need of replacement by Christianity. By persistently seeking to strip the victims of their Hindu identity rather than respecting their right to remain Hindu, the perpetrators demonstrated hostility towards the victims' continued adherence to Hinduism. This pattern of coercive conversion efforts, therefore, amounted not only to an infringement of the victims' religious freedom but also to religiously motivated targeting of the Hindu community, making it a clear instance of a religiously motivated hate crime. The perpetrators also denigrated Hindu deities and Hindu religious beliefs while simultaneously attempting to pressure the victims to convert to Christianity. In Hinduism, deities are revered as sacred manifestations of the Divine and occupy a central place in the faith, worship, cultural traditions and spiritual identity of devotees. Insulting Hindu deities and ridiculing Hindu religious beliefs in the course of conversion attempts was not merely offensive speech but a coercive tactic that targeted the very foundation of the victims' religious identity. By disparaging what the victims held most sacred while urging them to embrace another religion, the perpetrators sought to undermine the dignity of Hinduism and create psychological pressure to abandon it. This conduct conveyed that in the eyes of the accused, the victims' faith was inferior and unworthy of continued adherence, while presenting conversion to Christianity as the alternative. Such humiliation of sacred religious beliefs, coupled with sustained conversion efforts, demonstrated hostility towards Hinduism and the Hindu community and therefore constituted a clear manifestation of a religiously motivated hate crime. The repeated invitations to attend Christian prayer meetings also formed an integral part of the broader pattern of coercive conversion efforts. Although prayer meetings are ordinarily understood as gatherings for worship, spiritual reflection and religious fellowship, in this case, they were repeatedly promoted alongside persistent attempts to persuade tribal Hindus to convert to Christianity. Viewed in the wider context of the case, these meetings were not isolated acts of religious worship but functioned as a means of drawing Hindu villagers into an environment where they were repeatedly encouraged to abandon their existing faith. The repeated use of prayer meetings in conjunction with conversion attempts reflected a calculated pattern of religious persuasion directed specifically at members of the Hindu community. Rather than respecting the victims' freedom to continue practising their own religion, these gatherings formed part of a sustained effort to manipulate the victims and weaken their attachment to Hinduism and facilitate their conversion, thereby contributing to the religiously targeted nature of the offence. The fact that the accused repeatedly visited the tribal Hindu neighbourhood over an extended period, despite repeated objections from the villagers, demonstrated that the conduct was systematic rather than isolated. The perpetrators continued to visit the village for a considerable period and repeatedly encouraged Hindu villagers to accept Christianity, attend Christian prayer meetings and abandon their existing faith. This pattern of sustained targeting showed that the victims were singled out because of their Hindu identity and were subjected to continuous religious pressure instead of a one-time attempt at proselytisation. The persistence of these activities, even after explicit resistance from the villagers, reflected deliberate disregard for the victims' religious autonomy and their right to continue practising Hinduism. Such repeated and targeted efforts to pressure the Hindu community into abandoning its faith revealed a pattern of religious hostility directed against Hindus and reinforced the characterisation of this incident as a religiously motivated hate crime. Such instances of forced proselytisation are manifestations of doctrinal hostility embedded within Abrahamic religions like Christianity that regard non-adherents as inferior and encourage their conversion. This leads to the dehumanisation of those who do not share the faith and creates an environment in which coercive conversions become instruments for stripping Hindu individuals of their religious identity. Therefore, this case is being added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: Although the police registered a case against Pastor Sushant Gyani and his associate, Piyush Patel, this case has been documented with a total of three perpetrators. This is because a Christian prayer meeting was being organised at the residence of Lokesh Netam in the tribal neighbourhood on the day of the incident, and the complainants stated that such prayer meetings had been conducted regularly as part of the broader pattern of conversion activities in the village. Since his residence was used to facilitate these prayer meetings in connection with the repeated conversion efforts described by the complainants, Lokesh Netam has also been recorded as a perpetrator for documentation purposes. Accordingly, the total perpetrator count has been recorded as three. The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when the victim's ordeal began rather than when the incident was reported by the media. In this case, the complainants stated that the attempts to pressure tribal Hindus to convert to Christianity had been taking place for a considerable period and had occurred repeatedly. However, the reports do not specify when these activities first began. The only specific date mentioned is 24 June 2026, when the most recent incident occurred and culminated in a police complaint. Accordingly, 24 June 2026 has been selected as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes only.
Case Status
Arrested
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 2 To 5
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
