Hindus targeted as pastors from Delhi hold multi day conversion event inside Church in Kota, Rajasthan
Kota, Rajasthan, India 
3 November, 2025
Case Summary
A case of forced religious conversion was reported in Kota, Rajasthan, after Hindu organisations disclosed that pastors brought from Delhi conducted conversion activities inside the Beersheba Church in the Borakheda area between 4 and 6 November 2025. Members of the Bajrang Dal and other local groups submitted a memorandum to the District Collector and filed a complaint with the Borakheda police, presenting a video of Pastor Chandy Varghese as evidence. In the video, he is heard making statements about expanding Christianity in Rajasthan and replacing what he described as the rule of evil with the rule of Jesus. According to the complainants, the event was arranged through a man named Arun John, who facilitated the arrival of multiple pastors from Delhi to carry out conversion activities under the guise of a spiritual satsang. Police confirmed that an investigation had begun and that the video footage provided was being examined for authenticity. The church’s pastor, Arun Kumar, denied the allegations and stated that the gathering was only a spiritual satsang held with permission from the district administration. Police and intelligence officials visited the church and were given details of the programme.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category in this case is: Predatory Proselytisation. The subcategory under this is: Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination. 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 has been added to the tracker because the information presented by the complainants indicates a structured attempt to influence the religious beliefs of Hindu attendees through a coordinated programme framed as a spiritual gathering. The revelations describe a situation in which pastors were brought from outside the state, a multi-day event was organised in a controlled church setting, and messaging was delivered that encouraged participants to detach from their existing faith and embrace a contrasting religious doctrine. Even though the investigation is ongoing and the church leadership has denied the allegations, the material placed on record by those who filed the complaint shows that the event was perceived by the local community as an organised effort to introduce religious ideas in a manner that was neither transparent nor neutral. The reported content of the pastor’s statements plays a significant role in why this incident warrants documentation. The video cited by the complainants includes claims about Christianity spreading in Rajasthan, people being liberated from what he described as sinful bonds, and the region moving from what he termed the rule of evil to the rule of Jesus. This language, when delivered to Hindu attendees in the context of a structured gathering, suggests an intention to present the Hindu faith as inferior or spiritually harmful, and to position the Christian doctrine as the only legitimate alternative. Such rhetoric fits patterns in which targeted persuasion seeks to create disaffection in the minds of Hindu participants and gradually shift their religious orientation. The complaint further states that the event was arranged through an intermediary who facilitated the arrival of pastors from Delhi. This detail matters because it implies prior planning and deliberate mobilisation of individuals whose role was to lead the programme and influence the audience. When religious outreach is carried out in this manner, within a closed setting where participants may not fully understand the nature or purpose of the event, it raises concerns about subtle inducement, psychological influence, and the use of spiritual language to shape belief without open disclosure. The involvement of local organisations and their decision to escalate the matter to the district administration also demonstrates that the community understood the gathering as an attempt to shift the religious alignment of Hindu attendees. Their submission of the video as evidence suggests that the statements made by the pastor were an indicator of intent rather than casual speech. Even though the church representative later claimed that the event was only a spiritual satsang, the content of the video and the concerns of the complainants reveal why the case fits within a pattern of predatory proselytisation where manipulation, subtle persuasion, and doctrinal messaging are directed at Hindus. For these reasons, the case is documented as a hate-based incident involving targeted religious influence aimed at altering Hindu identity rather than open, consensual religious interaction. Disclaimer: The number of perpetrators in this case has been recorded as one for documentation purposes, as only one pastor has been specifically named in the available media reports.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
