Hindus, including women and minors, targeted through coordinated brainwashing and conversion attempt; Hindu activists attacked for intervening
Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, India 
28 June, 2025
Case Summary
In the Dhamtari district of Chhattisgarh, Christian missionaries were targeting Hindus, using inducements and prayer meetings to convert them to Christianity. Hindu Jagran Manch activists reported that they had earlier received alerts about similar illegal conversion activities taking place in five to six locations within Tikrapara. They reached the location. Upon entering the premises, the activists were attacked with chilli spray by unidentified individuals present at the scene. The spray caused severe eye irritation to several activists. Despite the physical discomfort, they proceeded into the house, raised slogans demanding an end to the conversion activities, and recited the Hanuman Chalisa. By that time, the individuals conducting the gathering had fled the scene. Following the disruption at one house, the group visited other nearby houses where similar prayer meetings were underway. Hindu Jagran Manch activists demanded that all unauthorised churches and prayer houses operating without government recognition be shut down. They submitted their appeal directly to the local tehsildar and warned of a larger protest movement if steps were not taken to halt religious conversions and proselytisation in the area. Soon after the incident, police personnel and the tehsildar, Suraj Banchhor, arrived at the location. At the time of writing this report, the investigation was ongoing.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under multiple categories due to the various religious markers present here. The first primary category is - Predatory proselytisation. Within this, the sub-category selected 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. 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 primary category selected is - Attack not resulting in death. Within it, the sub-category selected is - Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim. In several cases, Hindus are attacked for opposing religiously motivated crimes being committed against a fellow Hindu or simply for voicing an opinion opposing radical elements, who either have in the past or continue to persecute Hindus. In such cases, the initial attack against the victim, against which the Hindu was trying to defend the victim, would also need to be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime. Since the initial crime itself was religiously motivated and the subsequent crime of attempting to save the victim or speaking against the radical elements ends up inviting a violent attack, it would also be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime under this category. This case is categorised as a hate crime due to the systematic and repeated targeting of Hindus in multiple locations within the same locality. Hindu Jagran Manch activists received reports of illegal conversion attempts occurring in at least five to six houses in Tikrapara, indicating a deliberate and organised pattern of religious targeting. This repeated focus on Hindus—not random individuals—demonstrates an underlying religious hostility towards the Hindu community. Furthermore, the method employed reflects subtle religious grooming and indoctrination. In such cases, perpetrators manipulate emotional, social, or economic vulnerabilities over time to weaken the victim’s attachment to their own religion and gradually incline them toward another. These efforts often involve repeated exposure to contrasting beliefs, emotional persuasion, and psychological manipulation designed to create disaffection toward the victim’s native faith. The presence of minors and women points to the strategic selection of susceptible targets for long-term religious influence. It is further important to note here that some of the victims were minors, which means the element of consent and genuine change of conscience was missing ab initio. Minors, due to their young age and lack of maturity, are particularly vulnerable to manipulation and coercion. They may not have the ability to fully understand the implications of converting to another religion, and the Christian perpetrators purposely targeted and exploited this vulnerability of the victim. Since this case exemplifies the use of brainwashing and manipulation to achieve religious conversion, it is a blatant act of religious hate, which is why it has been documented here in the hate tracker. Also, inducements were being offered as part of the conversion effort, a common method seen in economically vulnerable Hindu communities. In such cases, the use of inducement—whether financial, medical, or educational—is not charity, but a religiously charged act of targeting individuals for their Hindu identity, with the goal of severing their ties with their dharmic tradition. Hence, it is a clear instance of a hate crime. The use of chilli spray on Hindu Jagran Manch activists is not just a matter of assault; it was an act of violence carried out against those standing up to protect a religiously motivated conversion campaign. The activists were not protesting for personal reasons—they were trying to halt religiously predatory activity targeting fellow Hindus, especially vulnerable groups like women and children. The attack was thus not isolated, but a direct response to their opposition to religious aggression. In many similar incidents, those who speak up or resist conversions are subjected to intimidation or violence. Here, the physical assault was clearly aimed at defending a radical religious activity—namely, illegal conversions of Hindus—and silencing resistance. As such, the assault must be recognised not just as a public disturbance, but as a religiously motivated attack intended to facilitate proselytisation through fear and force. Hence, this incident is a religiously motivated hate crime on multiple levels: it involves a targeted pattern of predatory proselytisation directed at Hindus through subtle indoctrination and inducement, and those who opposed it faced organised, violent resistance. The religious identity of the victims—both those targeted for conversion and those defending them—was central to the motives and methods used, making this a clear example of systematic hate-driven religious aggression.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
Unknown
Perpetrators Gender
unknown
Sources 
