This is the first of a two part series on the recent arrest of two nuns in Chhattisgarh's Durg under unjustified charges of conversion.
IN A MATTER OF RELIEF, on August 2, 2025, bail was granted to the two Catholic nuns, Sr Preeti Mary, Sr. Vandana Francis and a tribal youth who was accompanying them in Chhattisgarh, Sukhman Mandavi. All evidence suggests that the arrests, made on July 25, were needless in nature.
On July 25,Sr Preeti Mary and Sr. Vandana Francis of the Congregation of Assisi Sisters of Mary Immaculate were arrested by the Chhattisgarh Government Railway Police (‘GRP’) in Durg Railway Station in Chhattisgarh on unfounded charges of religious conversion and human trafficking. A young man accompanying the nuns, Sukhman Mandavi, who hailed from a tribal community, was also detained.
The nuns, originally from Kerala, were waiting at the railway station platform with three other women, all of whom hailed from tribal communities and were aged between 18 to 20 years of age, to catch a train to Agra.Media reports suggest that when the Train Ticket Examiner enquired the three women regarding their tickets. On informing the TTE that their tickets were with the nuns, the TTE immediately called members of the Durga Vahini Matrushakti and Bajrang Dal, right-wing activist groups that have consistently engaged in harassing religious minorities in the country. Soon the nuns were surrounded, heckled and verbally abused, with a mob accusing them of forceful conversion and trafficking. This occurred even as the women and nuns reiterated that they were travelling to Agra to work in hospitals as helps at salaries of Rs 8,000 – 10,000 per month.
Police reports state that the women were being taken to Agra for vocational training and employment. The incident escalated into a standoff, with Bajrang Dal members staging protests outside the Government Railway Police station. Counter-protests soon followed, with the local Christian community defending the nuns.
The FIR, registered under sections of the Chhattisgarh Religious Freedom Act and the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, was based on a complaint by a local Bajrang Dal worker, who alleged that the accused forcibly converted three women from Narayanpur district and were attempting to traffic them.
Even though the police arrived while the right-wing group workers were heckling and intimidating the group, they did not intervene to stop the intimidation of the nuns. The trio (the two nuns and the youth) were then arrested and taken to the Durg Police station. Then, a local court sent them to judicial custody till August 8.
They were charged under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 , the Chhattisgarh Freedom of Religion Act and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act.
According to the FIR, charges include:
Section 143 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) – Trafficking of person
Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Freedom of Religion Act – Unlawful Conversions
As trafficking is considered a ‘Scheduled Offense’ under the amended NIA Act, the Centre can invoke the provisions of the Act for investigation by the NIA, with proceedings before the special NIA Court.
The nuns moved bail applications before both the Judicial Magistrate First Class (‘JFMC’) and the Sessions Court at Durg, in succession. The JFMC rejected the bail application on July 29, 2025. On July 30, the Sessions Court also denied bail on the ground that only the NIA Court had jurisdiction to hear the application because of the human trafficking charge. The sanction of the Central government, on application from the state government, to try the case as a Scheduled Offence under the NIA Act, need only be furnished in fifteen days.
On August 2, the nuns and the tribal youth were conditionally granted bail by the NIA Court in Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, at a bond of Rs 50,000 each. The court also imposed the condition that all three must surrender their passports and fulfill reporting requirements.
Amidst increasing anti-Christian sentiment, religious freedom is at a crossroad
As a secular state, India is characterised by religious tolerance, equal treatment of all religious groups and respect for all faiths and religions. Constitutionally, all religions enjoy the same protection without favour or discrimination. Secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution, and the latter protects freedom of religion and conscience, as well as the right of all individuals to freely profess, practice and propagate religion under Article 25,.
While freedom of religion and conscience is a fundamental right in India, its operation is subject to public order, morality, health and other fundamental rights. This is in consonance with Article 18(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
However, in India, various anti-conversion laws impose restrictions, prohibit conversions from one religion to another by the use of force, inducement, allurement, or fraudulent means. In 2022, a written statement submitted by the European Centre on Law and Justice to the UN General Assembly highlighted the scope and extent of violence perpetrated against the Christian community in the country owing to these state anti-conversion laws. The statement also urged the UNGA to call on India to repeal the anti-conversion laws. The constitutional validity of these laws has been contested before state High Courts and the Supreme Court.
In Rev Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977) the Supreme Court of India had upheld the constitutional validity of a legislation prohibiting conversion of a person by force, fraud or allurement. While this has precedential value, the rulings in states are not uniform. In fact, leading up to the Rev Stanislaus decision, the Orissa High Court had, in 1972, held such a law as unconstitutional, a decision subsequently overturned by the top Court five years later.
The anti-conversion laws are in effect against the constitutional guarantee to practice and propagate one’s religion. If freedom of religion is essential to support personal beliefs rooted in the inward association doctrine, then individuals must have the right to change their beliefs and religion. Limiting this freedom to change one's religion undermines the very principle of religious freedom. They limit and punish an individual’s right to convert and right to persuade or support another individual to convert voluntarily.
Moreover, while upholding the constitutionality of such laws, the Supreme Court, in 1977, failed to discuss the definitions of inducement and allurement. This wide scope for defining the terms allows irresponsible statements from people in powerful positions, with very real implications for practitioners of the faith.
This is precisely what happened in the case concerning the nuns in Chhattisgarh. Framing the incident as one of women’s safety, Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Vishnu Deo Sai posted on X: “Three daughters of Narayanpur were promised nursing training and later jobs. It’s an attempt to convert people through human trafficking by allurement. Investigation is ongoing. The case is sub-judice.” The equivalence of allurement to employment and education opportunities without any reasonable boundaries further permit the harassment of the community on unreasonable grounds.
Such laws empower and encourage government persecution, vigilante violence, and discrimination against religious minorities, while also intensifying efforts to suppress civil society organizations. Given these particularly severe religious freedom violations, the USCIRF in 2023 recommended that the U.S. Department of State designate India as a country of particular concern under the International Religious Freedom Act.
The arrest of the nuns comes amidst growing fear and marginalization faced by Adivasi (indigenous) Christians in Chhattisgarh. Reports highlight instances of families being ostracized, denied access to local resources, and even prohibited from burying their dead-on ancestral land. Observers note that the rising hostility includes social boycotts, violence, and pressure to reconvert.
Degree Prasad Chouhan, state convener of the Chhattisgarh Association for Justice and Equality, recently told Frontline that such incidents are on the rise, fuelled by state repression and caste tensions. He emphasised, “Anti-conversion rhetoric is being used to justify discrimination against Adivasi Christians. Despite constitutional protections, Christians are treated with suspicion, legally harassed, and deprived of basic rights." He also pointed out that local gram sabhas (village councils) have exploited laws such as the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, which grants autonomy to tribal communities, to prevent nuns and priests from entering villages.
Moreover, as noted earlier, the FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint by right-wing group workers, and not the alleged ‘victims’ of conversion (the women in question).
Notably, the Karnataka High Court last month, in Mustafa and Ors v State of Karnataka (2025), read down provisions of Section 4 of the state anti-conversion law , quashing a FIR against three Muslim men and holding that third parties cannot file such cases.
In the case of the nuns, although the Freedom of Religion Act has been invoked, no evidence points to the fact of conversion. One of the women involved in the incident has publicly stated that she was coerced into making statements against the nuns. Despite her repeated pleas and statements pointing otherwise, the police recorded statements to the contrary. This could have been done seemingly under influence of right-wing group workers.
The family members of the tribal women also denied allegations of coercion. “Our parents are no longer alive, and I sent my sister with the nuns so she could take up a nursing job in Agra,” one family member has stated, “The sisters (nuns) have done nothing wrong. Even the boy is being falsely implicated.”
Increasingly, state machineries are giving in to mob justice
That the TTE prioritised calling right-wing Hindutva group functionaries instead of the police first is telling of the anti-Christian sentiment rife within public institutions in the country. That the police stood by and watched as the nuns were intimidated by the right-wing Hindu fundamentalist activists gives more credence to this assertion. Videos circulated of the incident show one woman in particular, Jyoti Sharma, a member of the Durga Vahini Matrushakti, use derogatory language while accusing the nuns of forcibly converting and trafficking the girls.
Eyewitnesses reported that before their arrest, the nuns were illegally detained, harassed, and humiliated by Sharma and her associates in the presence of police personnel. Despite this, no FIR has been filed against Sharma. The Chhattisgarh Christian Forum claims it will file a counter FIR.
Only law enforcement agencies possess the authority to detain and question suspects and investigate crimes, and they must do so in accordance with due process. However, concerned citizens have raised doubts about the impartiality of the law enforcement agencies in such a tense situation. Rather than de-escalating the conflict and properly investigating the allegations, the Chhattisgarh police based their FIR largely on the statements from the right-wing group.
The Supreme Court has, on several occasions, underlined the dangers of mob vigilantism. But, as noted in a recent editorial in Indian Express , whether it is cow protection cases or matters related to religious conversion, law enforcement agencies show a disturbing tendency to let self-proclaimed community leaders take over.
The NIA Act has been invoked to create procedural ambiguity
The NIA Act constitutes an investigation agency at the national level to investigate and prosecute offences affecting the sovereignty, security and integrity of India, security of State, friendly relations with foreign States and offences under Acts enacted to implement international treaties, agreements, conventions and resolutions of the UN, its agencies and other international organizations.
The legislation empowers the Central government to direct the NIA to take over a case on a request made by the state government or in its own capacity. The NIA Act was amended in 2019 to enlarge the mandate of the NIA by inclusion of offences related to human trafficking, manufacture/sale of prohibited arms, cyber-terrorism and offences under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, and expanded its jurisdiction beyond India.
The NIA Act was brought in to facilitate speedy trials and deliver quick judicial pronouncements by the establishment of the special courts. As of December 5, 2024, the NIA had registered 640 cases since its inception. There were 109 cases under active investigation and 395 under further investigation. 505 cases had been charge- sheeted, while 4174 accused had been arrested so far by the NIA. 595 have been convicted.
By booking the nuns under NIA, religious freedom has been completely conflated with terrorist activities and trafficking. This indicates the lengths to which the State is willing to go in order to create a chilling effect for religious minorities in India. The procedural ambiguities in legislations like the NIA further ensures that the accused are systemically denied due process and their right to a fair trial, creating endless points of contention with the State.
For the nuns and the young women, a routine train travel for better economic opportunities has turned into a nightmare facilitated by state machinery and legislation. The sanctity of the religious habit has been violated to further a collective agenda to impinge on the fundamental rights of religious minorities in the country.
The situation of minorities, and in particular Muslims and Christians, continues to remain parlous.
The next part of the series shall focus on the national and international politics surrounding the arrests.