Durg: A critical twist has emerged in the case involving the arrest of two Malayali nuns in Durg, Chhattisgarh, as a key family involved has publicly countered the allegations of human trafficking and forced religious conversion. Budhiya Pradhan, the mother of Kamleshwari Pradhan one of the girls reportedly “rescued” revealed that her daughter had gone with the nuns voluntarily and with full family consent.
Speaking to Asianet News, Budhiya stated, “Our daughter left with the sisters after we gave permission. There was no coercion or deception involved.” She elaborated that the family had been under financial stress due to a ₹5 lakh loan taken to build their home. The opportunity provided by the nuns a job in cooking was seen as a chance for Kamleshwari to support her family.
“In our village, many people leave to work in other places. We never needed to get government permission for that. Why is it an issue now?” she asked.
Budhiya also disclosed that the family converted to Christianity five years ago and that their faith is being unfairly targeted. “We were Hindus before, but we chose Christianity. Nobody forced us. Now, after the sisters were arrested, Bajrang Dal members have come to our house and issued threats. We’re scared,” she said.
The two nuns were arrested on charges of human trafficking and religious conversion but were released on conditional bail after spending nine days in jail. The NIA court in Bilaspur granted them bail on Thursday.
The sisters had travelled with three tribal girls to assist them with employment opportunities. However, police detained them at Durg railway station following complaints reportedly lodged by right-wing activists.
The incident has sparked outrage across faith communities and human rights groups, with calls growing for an unbiased investigation and protection of minority rights. The statement from Kamleshwari’s mother adds another layer of complexity to the case challenging the narrative of forced conversion and raising serious questions about the role of vigilante interference.
As the legal battle continues, the episode has reopened discussions on freedom of movement, religious liberty, and the dangers of communal polarization.