Hindus lured for Christian conversion under the pretext of a healing meeting, Bajrang Dal workers attacked for opposing proselytisation attempt
Maharajganj, Uttar Pradesh, India 
7 July, 2025
Case Summary
Religious conversion was happening in Bhaisauri Tola of Barhara village in Maharajganj district on July 8, when the situation turned violent. According to reports, a covert Christian proselytisation event was being conducted under the pretext of a “healing meeting” inside a private home. Upon receiving information, Bajrang Dal Siswa block convenor Ankit Chaudhary alerted the Kotwali police and proceeded to the location with local volunteers. At the site, they found Manohar Prasad and Virendra Kumar, along with several others, attempting to convert local Hindu residents. When the Bajrang Dal workers objected, they were attacked with sticks, rods, and shovels by the individuals conducting the meeting. Police soon reached the spot and intervened. A case under provisions related to unlawful religious conversion was registered against Manohar Prasad, a resident of Pipra Sohavath (Kolhui police station), and Virendra Kumar, a resident of Sarpatha (Campierganj police station). Investigations were ongoing to determine the involvement of other persons present at the scene.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The first primary category in this case is: Predatory proselytisation. The secondary category under this is: Conversion/attempt 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 primary category in this case is: Attack not resulting in death. The secondary category under this is: Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save the 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. The first aspect involves covert proselytisation carried out under the guise of a "healing meeting," wherein economically vulnerable Hindu individuals were being lured into conversion by Christian proselytisers. The inducement offered, whether in the form of emotional manipulation, supposed miraculous cures, or promises of material upliftment, was designed to sever the individual from their religious identity and embed them within a non-Hindu religious framework. The conversion attempt was not incidental, but targeted specifically at Hindus on account of their religion, thereby making their Hindu identity central to the offence. This practice of exploiting socio-economic vulnerabilities to systematically convert members of a particular religious group is both discriminatory and predatory in nature. It treats the Hindu population not as individuals, but as a demographic to be dismantled religiously, one conversion at a time. The second dimension of the crime concerns the violent backlash faced by members of the Hindu community who opposed the unlawful conversion. The Bajrang Dal workers who arrived at the site in response to the conversion attempt were assaulted with sticks, rods, and shovels, an act of calculated aggression clearly designed to silence resistance and assert ideological dominance. Here, too, the underlying animosity stems from a refusal to allow Hindus to safeguard their religious community from coerced conversion. The attack was not a spontaneous personal altercation but a defensive reaction by the perpetrators to protect their religiously motivated operation and deter future opposition. Therefore, both the conversion attempt and the ensuing assault emerge from a systematic bias against Hinduism and Hindus. These actions cannot be understood as isolated criminality; rather, they fit within a broader framework of religiously motivated hostility, exploitation, and violence. As such, the incident is appropriately classified as a hate crime under both categories outlined above.
Case Status
Complaint registered
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 2 To 5
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
