Hindu family pressured to convert to Christianity; brutally assaulted and molested for resisting conversion
Giridih, Jharkhand, India 
17 January, 2026
Case Summary
In the Tara village of Giridih district, Jharkhand, a Hindu woman and her son were attacked for refusing to convert to Christianity by Christian evangelists. According to reports, the victim, Chinta Devi, the wife of Digambar Sao, filed a complaint at the Jamua police station. She stated that four Christian missionaries named Laxmi Narayan Sao, alias Maha Sao, along with Ranjit Sao, Manju Devi and Rukwa Devi, regularly conducted Christian worship in their house every Sunday and exerted pressure on Hindu villagers to convert to Christianity. Similarly, the victim, Chinta Devi, and her son, Suraj Kumar, were forcibly summoned by the perpetrators and pressured to convert to Christianity. When both refused, they were brutally assaulted. Maha Sao also molested Chinta Devi during the incident. At the same time, Ranjit Sao, Manju Devi, and Rukwa Devi kicked and punched her son, Suraj Kumar, with Ranjit Sao attempting to strangle him using a towel. During the assault, when the victim’s daughter-in-law, Ruby Devi, arrived and attempted to intervene, she was pushed to the ground and her blouse was torn. On hearing the victim’s cries, nearby villagers gathered at the spot, following which the accused fled the scene. Subsequently, the victim submitted a written application to the Jamua police station seeking justice, an impartial investigation, and strict legal action. Jamua police station officer Vibhuti Dev confirmed that the application was received and stated that legal action would follow after investigation.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category- Predatory Proselytisation. Within this, 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. Another subcategory selected is- Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination. Within this, the tertiary categories selected are- 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 the 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 proselytisation, such cases are considered religiously motivated hate crimes. The second primary category selected here is - Attack not resulting in death. Within it, the sub-category selected is 'Attacked for refusal to convert. When there is pressure, threat or coercion employed upon the Hindu victim to convert to a different religion, in several cases, the victim refuses to succumb to the pressure/threats. Once the victim refuses, the perpetrator proceeds to attack/assault the victim owing to his/her refusal to convert. In such cases, the pressure/threat/intimidation/coercion/violence itself is driven by animosity towards the victim’s Hindu faith. The violence then is another hate crime driven by the victim’s refusal to abandon his professed faith, Hinduism, and convert to the religion of a non-Hindu perpetrator. Since the victim’s faith is at the heart of the pressure to convert and the ensuing violence towards the victim, such cases are considered religiously motivated hate crimes. This case was added to the tracker as a Hindu woman and her family were subjected to violence and sexual abuse after resisting sustained pressure to abandon Hinduism and convert to Christianity. The incident demonstrated a clear instance of coercive proselytisation followed by targeted violence, rooted in hostility towards the victims’ Hindu religious identity. Firstly, the perpetrators pressured the victim and her son to renounce their Hindu faith and adopt Christianity. Pressuring Hindu individuals to discard their religious faith and embrace another was 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 was not simply about personal differences but about erasing the victim’s Hindu faith, making it a religiously motivated crime. Secondly, when the victim and her family refused to convert, the perpetrators resorted to physical violence. The victim, Chinta Devi, was sexually molested during the assault, while her son was brutally beaten. The violence occurred directly as a consequence of their refusal to abandon Hinduism, indicating that the assault functioned as punishment for resisting conversion. It was a deliberate attempt to punish and intimidate the victim for adhering to his religion and not converting. Attacking a Hindu individual just for refusing conversion showcases the intensity with which the perpetrators would go to enforce conversions, making it a religiously motivated offence. Thirdly, the victims also revealed that the perpetrators regularly conducted Christian worship in their house every Sunday and exerted pressure on Hindu villagers to convert to Christianity. Thus, the nature of the conversion efforts and the wider impact on the Hindu community all indicate a targeted action against Hindus as a collectivity. When individuals or groups focus their efforts on converting members of a particular religion, in this case, Hindus, then it demonstrates a fundamental disregard for the Hindu faith. Conversion, especially when not based on personal conviction but rather on external persuasion or pressure, is not simply about sharing a different belief system. It was an attempt to undermine the values, traditions, and identity of 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. In this case, the combination of forced conversion attempts, sexual violence, and retaliatory assault demonstrated that the actions were neither incidental nor isolated but stemmed from religious animosity towards Hindu victims. Thus, this case was added to the tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incidents based on when an event occurred or when the victim's ordeal began. It is important to clarify that the report does not specify the exact date when the incident occurred. Therefore, for documentation purposes, we have recorded the date based on when it was reported in the media, 17 January 2026.
Victim Details
Total Victim
2
Deceased
0
Gender
- Male 1
- Female 1
- Third Gender 0
- Unknown 0
Caste
- SC/ST 0
- OBC 0
- General 0
- Unknown 2
Age Group
- Minor 0
- Adult 2
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 0
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 2 To 5
Perpetrators Gender
both
Sources 
