Hindu students targeted for conversion, Hindu deities mocked by Christian HOD in Tirupati's Sri Venkateshwara University, Andhra Pradesh
Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India 
1 December, 2024
Case Summary
Hindu students at Sri Venkateswara University (SVU) College of Engineering, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, were subjected to Christian religious sermons during regular classroom lectures by Prof. Ch. Changaiah, Head of the Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department, during which Hindu deities were also disrespected. Upon receiving complaints from students, Bajrang Dal activists confronted Prof. Ch. Changaiah directly and raised a formal complaint with the university authorities, seeking action against the misuse of an academic position for religious propagation. The complaint stated that during regular lecture hours, Prof. Ch. Changaiah promoted Christianity and made remarks disrespecting Hindu deities while addressing Hindu students. Meanwhile, the Legal Rights Protection Forum (LRPF), a Secunderabad-based organisation, submitted a written complaint to the Governor of Andhra Pradesh, stating that Prof. Ch. Changaiah misused his official position to subject Hindu students to Christian religious messaging. The complaint also called for his immediate termination, stating that Prof. Ch. Changaiah, a Christian, had secured his government position by using a Scheduled Caste certificate. Subsequently, SVU Vice-Chancellor Prof. Ch. Appa Rao ordered the constitution of a fact-finding committee to inquire into the allegations of religious propagation targeting Hindu students. The committee examined the allegations relating to the propagation of Christianity in classrooms. During the inquiry, Dr Changaiah admitted to being a Christian and acknowledged promoting Christianity to students. The inquiry, therefore, concluded that the allegations were substantiated. The professor, who had served as Head of the Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering and as Dean (SCDC), was removed from his departmental leadership role on 15 December 2024.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category selected for the Hate Crime is Predatory Proselytisation; the secondary category selected is Conversion/ attempts to convert by inducement. Predatory Proselytisation is not just limited to threat, harassment, force, and violence, but it also has contours of stealth. In several cases, the Hindu victim is exploited to convert, with non-Hindus taking advantage of their poverty. In such cases, the Hindu victim who is suffering financially is offered monetary benefits, including lucrative offers for jobs, health treatment, education, etc, to induce the victim into changing his/her religion. In such cases, the religious identity of the victim and the aim to disenfranchise him from his faith form the heart of the crime. Also, taking advantage of and exploiting an individual’s economic vulnerabilities is widely acknowledged as exploitation, forms of which are often penalised by law. Such cases, therefore, are considered religiously motivated hate crimes since the victim’s religious identity forms the very heart of the crime itself. The second 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 secondary category selected for this case is Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination, and 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. In the present case, Hindu students were subjected to Christian religious sermons during official classroom lectures conducted by the Head of the Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department. The classroom is an institutional space designated solely for academic instruction, and students are required to attend lectures conducted by faculty members who exercise authority over their academic progression. The use of this space and authority to disseminate Christian religious teachings constitutes a clear abuse of a fiduciary and authoritative relationship. The victims in this case were Hindu students, including young and impressionable individuals, who were exposed to religious messaging unrelated to the academic curriculum. The deliberate promotion of Christianity during lecture hours and the disrespect shown towards Hindu deities demonstrate a targeted effort to undermine the students’ Hindu religious identity and instil disaffection towards their faith. Such conduct reflects religious hostility towards Hinduism and its practitioners. The perpetrator occupied a senior academic position and used institutional legitimacy to normalise religious indoctrination within an educational setting. When authority figures exploit their position to impose or promote a competing religious ideology to Hindu students, the act is not incidental but calculated, as students are placed in a position where resistance carries academic and social consequences. The conduct occurred within a Hindu-majority institution located in Tirupati, a prominent Hindu religious centre. The targeting of Hindu students in such a setting underscores religious profiling, where the victims’ Hindu identity formed the basis of the perpetrator’s actions. The sustained nature of the conduct, institutional complaints, and inquiry findings establish that the acts were not isolated expressions but part of a deliberate and systematic effort to propagate Christianity to Hindu students. By exploiting academic authority, targeting Hindu students during mandatory lectures, and promoting a competing faith while disrespecting Hindu deities, the perpetrator engaged in conduct rooted in religious animosity towards Hindus. These actions were designed to erode the religious identity of Hindu students and interfere with their right to practise their faith freely. For these reasons, this case is being recorded in the Hinduphobia Tracker hate crime database as a religiously motivated hate crime against Hindus. Disclaimer: Media reports do not specify the exact date when the incident happened or when the video was recorded. Therefore, for documentation purposes, 2nd December 2025 is being taken as the indicative date of the incident, the original date when the case was reported in the media. Hinduphobia Tracker records the date when the victim’s ordeal begins rather than the date when it is reported in the media, but in the present case since the date is not mentioned, the date reported in the media is considered.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
