The recent attack on two nuns, Sister Preeti Mary and Sister Vandana Francis, along with a tribal youth, Sukhman Mandavi, by Bajrang Dal members at Durg railway station in Chhattisgarh, has drawn sharp media attention. The incident, followed by the registration of cases of alleged forced conversion and human trafficking against the nuns and Mandavi—and the subsequent bail granted to them by the NIA court—has sparked political controversy.

Despite a complaint lodged at Narayanpur police station by three tribal women from Orchha, who were travelling with the nuns, no action has yet been taken against the Bajrang Dal members involved in the assault. The state government has been left embarrassed as the NIA court found the prima facie evidence presented against the accused to be unconvincing, resulting in bail being granted with apparent ease. In an attempt to cover up this setback, the Sangh Parivar has intensified its Hindutva campaign, vowing to step up its anti-conversion drive and pressing harder for the de-listing of converted tribals from Scheduled Tribe benefits. A state minister has even asserted that the accused, despite being granted bail, “will not escape punishment.”

In Chhattisgarh, BJP leaders have used the occasion to launch attacks on Christian missionaries and nuns, while in Kerala, the state BJP president has expressed support for the nuns. The contrast is telling: in Chhattisgarh, the BJP appears to be pursuing a strategy of communal polarisation, attempting to create hostility among the majority Hindu population toward minorities, while in Kerala, where Christians form a significant community, the party avoids antagonising them. This selective morality is not new. It is reminiscent of the BJP’s promises to provide high-quality beef in election campaigns in Kerala and the Northeast—despite its cow-protection posturing—and the fact that many of its leaders have no qualms about eating beef themselves. Such contradictions reveal how the party exploits social prejudices to further its political agenda.

The facts of the case, however, speak for themselves. Sisters Preeti Mary and Vandana Francis, both originally from Kerala, have spent years serving deprived communities in remote parts of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh through clinics and hospitals run by their religious institutes. Needing kitchen helpers for their institutions in Agra, Bhopal, and Shahdol, they reached out to a former assistant, a tribal woman named Sukhmati. Married and now the mother of a three-year-old child, Sukhmati contacted families in Narayanpur district, three of whom agreed to send young women for the opportunity. The three—Lalita, Kamleshwari, and another Sukhmati—planned to travel to Agra for training. Since they had never travelled outside their district, their parents asked Sukhman Mandavi, the elder brother of the ex-assistant, to accompany them to Durg station, where the nuns would meet them and continue the journey.

At the station, a ticket inspector asked about their travel, and was told that the tickets were with the nuns who would be taking them to Agra. This exchange was overheard by a Bajrang Dal member, and it is alleged that the inspector tipped off others. When the nuns arrived, a group of Bajrang Dal activists quickly assembled, shouting aggressive slogans, accusing them of forced conversions and trafficking, and demanding their arrest. At the railway police control room, all the tribal women clearly stated they were travelling voluntarily. Sukhman contacted their parents, who also confirmed their consent.

Despite these statements, the control room became a stage for Bajrang Dal hooliganism. Video evidence shows members, led by a woman named Jyoti Sharma, hurling obscene and derogatory abuse at the nuns, physically assaulting Mandavi, and attempting to force her into a false confession. The police stood by without intervening. On the basis of a complaint from a Bajrang Dal leader, the nuns and Mandavi were arrested. The three tribal women were sent to a government shelter home and kept in isolation, denied access to their parents, who reiterated that their daughters were long-time Christians and had voluntarily chosen to work with the nuns.

It is evident that this case involves neither forced conversion nor human trafficking. What it does expose is the brazen hooliganism of Bajrang Dal members and the complicit inaction of the police—clear violations of the Constitution, the rule of law, and basic human rights.

At its core, the incident raises fundamental questions: Do minorities and tribals in India not have the freedom to travel for employment? Can citizens of different faiths not journey together without facing intimidation and violence? The answers should be obvious in a democracy governed by constitutional rights. Yet the events at Durg station show how fragile these freedoms can be when bigotry is given a free hand.


The author is an independent writer on politics, social and agrarian issues. The views are personal.