Hindus forced to convert to Christianity by offering inducements and denigrating Hindu deities; accused ran organised conversion racket
Nagaur, Rajasthan, India 
17 December, 2017
Case Summary
A large-scale, organised religious conversion racket was exposed in Didwana town of Nagaur district, Rajasthan, where poor, Dalit and socially vulnerable Hindu communities were targeted and offered inducements for religious conversion by a Christian man named Lalchand David. The accused also abused and insulted Hindu deities in order to push people towards conversion. The religious conversion racket was exposed after a Dalit Hindu man named Rahul from the Salt Road area lodged a complaint at the Didwana police station. He stated that he had been suffering from severe spinal pain and, hoping to seek relief, he contacted the accused, Lalchand David, who invited him to a prayer meeting. During the prayer meeting, which was conducted at Lalchand’s residence, the accused made derogatory remarks against Hindu deities. The accused pressured the victim to abandon Hindu worship and adopt Christianity, claiming that it would alleviate his illness and suffering. The victim was subjected to purification rituals using holy water and was instructed to remove idols of Hindu deities from his home. Upon realising the systematic nature of the coercion, the victim approached the police, prompting a wider investigation. Police investigations established that Lalchand David, a resident of Nawalgarh, Rajasthan, had been operating an illegal religious conversion network, primarily targeting poor, Dalit and socially vulnerable Hindu communities, including the Valmiki Hindu community. He offered various forms of inducements, such as financial assistance, the lure of jobs and marriage, and so-called healing in the name of curing illnesses, to induce religious conversion in his victims. The network first became active after the accused arrived in Didwana in 2017 and began living in a rented house in Adarsh Nagar, where he initially converted his landlord’s family before expanding his activities to labourers and economically marginalised families, particularly from the Valmiki Hindu community. Police findings revealed that Lalchand had undergone religious conversion himself during 2004–05 while studying in Jaipur, after being persuaded that prayer would cure his mother’s illness. Following this, he became actively involved in spreading religious conversions and later settled permanently in Didwana, constructing his own house on Salt Road, where regular prayer gatherings were held. More than 100 individuals were identified as having been converted over the years, with indications of a much larger network operating across Rajasthan. Police also recovered documents pointing to foreign funding, which were taken into custody for detailed examination. The role of Lalchand’s brother-in-law, who had already converted earlier, was also identified in assisting the expansion of the network. Lalchand was arrested and booked under Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 5 of the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2025. As of the date of writing this report, the investigation was ongoing.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of - Predatory Proselytisation. Within it, the sub-category 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. The other sub-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 other sub-category 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 sub-category selected here 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. This case has been added to the tracker because poor and Dalit Hindu communities were targeted and offered inducements for religious conversion by the Christian accused, Lalchand David. Firstly, the accused lured the Dalit Hindu man, Rahul, to a prayer meeting where he was persuaded for religious conversion. The accused also used to organise prayer meetings at his house in order to convert Hindu residents. What was often presented as a simple prayer gathering inside a house was in reality a covert attempt at religious conversion. These were not genuine community prayers but calculated efforts to exploit the trust of Hindus and manipulate them into abandoning their faith. By conducting such gatherings, the accused sought to manipulate vulnerable Hindus, taking advantage of their emotional and social circumstances to push them towards conversion. Secondly, offering incentives or making false healing promises, especially when directed at vulnerable individuals in need, shows that these incentives are not acts of kindness or charity. Instead, they are calculated moves to exploit vulnerable Hindus because of their religion. By providing inducements or promising healing in exchange for conversion, the accused was effectively blackmailing those who might have been desperate for assistance or hope. Such instances are seen in many cases where members of Christian missionary groups target socially and economically vulnerable Hindus to further their agenda of religious conversions. This form of coercion strips people of their agency and dignity and results in coerced conversions. These are not random or isolated incidents, but rather cases deeply rooted in religious animosity towards Hindu victims. Thirdly, the accused also denigrated Hindu deities and instructed Hindus to remove idols from their home. This goes beyond religious debate or proselytisation; it constitutes an act of incitement and insult directed at the core beliefs of the Hindu community. Such remarks are designed to demean and undermine the faith of Hindus and intend to create an inferiority complex in the minds of the victims against their own faith. This fosters an environment of hostility and disrespect towards the Hindu community and Hindu deities. These acts of insulting Hinduism stem from Christian theology, which harbours disdain and hatred for polytheistic faiths, and which categorises Hindus as ‘polytheists’, thereby fostering hatred against them. Such actions make the religiously motivated nature of the crime even more evident. Fourth, the accused attempted to convert the Dalit and Valmiki Hindu communities by pressuring them and coercing them to convert. Pressuring a Hindu residents to discard their religious faith and embrace another is a direct attack on their religious identity and dignity. It was not a matter of personal choice; it was coercion rooted in hostility towards the victim's Hindu identity. Such an attempt reflects religious animosity because the act is not simply about personal differences but about erasing the victim’s Hindu faith, making it a religiously motivated crime. The nature of the conversion activities and their cumulative impact on the local Hindu population demonstrated a targeted action against Hindus as a collectivity. The conversion network operated by Lalchand David focused exclusively on economically and socially vulnerable Hindus, particularly from Dalit and Valmiki communities, indicating a deliberate targeting based on religious identity. This systematic attempt to erode the religious foundation of individuals and replace it with allegiance to another faith reflects deep religious malice and animus against the Hindu identity. Conversion in this context was not rooted in personal conviction but was driven by exploitation of illness, poverty, and social insecurity. By pressuring victims to abandon Hindu worship, remove idols from their homes, and accept purification rituals, the perpetrators sought to erode Hindu religious identity and traditions. Such actions reflected a fundamental disregard for Hinduism and its followers and were aimed at stripping Hindu victims of their faith, thereby constituting a religiously motivated crime directed specifically against the Hindu community. The Christian faith, by its very theological foundations, places a strong emphasis on proselytisation. In pursuit of conversion objectives, Christian evangelists often employ unethical means, ranging from psychological pressure and misinformation to inducements such as money or jobs. These tactics are designed not as acts of charity but as tools to engineer religious change under the guise of social upliftment, particularly among vulnerable and underprivileged communities. Disclaimer: Media reports and police investigations have stated that the accused has been involved in religious conversions since 2017 and that over 100 individuals were converted during this period. While the actual number of victims may be higher, for documentation purposes, the victim count in this case has been conservatively recorded as 101, including the Dalit Hindu man named Rahul, whose complaint led to the exposure of the network. Disclaimer: Although the police formally arrested only the main accused, Lalchand David, the investigation also identified the involvement of his brother-in-law in assisting and expanding the religious conversion network. Therefore, for documentation purposes, the perpetrator count has been recorded as two. Disclaimer: It is important to clarify that none of the media sources covering this case have specified the exact date since when the accused began converting Hindus, though it is mentioned that he started converting people in 2017. Thus, to document this case, we have used an indicative date—18 December 2017—as a placeholder to represent the beginning of conversion activities. While media coverage of the incident emerged on 18 December 2025, the Hinduphobia Tracker records the incident based on when the victim’s ordeal began, not when it was reported.
Victim Details
Total Victim
101
Deceased
0
Gender
- Male 0
- Female 0
- Third Gender 0
- Unknown 101
Caste
- SC/ST 0
- OBC 101
- General 0
- Unknown 0
Age Group
- Minor 0
- Adult 0
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 101
Case Status
Case sub-judice
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 2 To 5
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
