Tribal Women Denied Justice at State Women’s Commission in Durg Nun Case

Chhattisgarh, September 11, 2025: Tribal women from Narayanpur district have alleged that they were denied justice during a recent hearing before the State Women’s Commission. The hearing was connected to the Durg Nun case, in which two nuns and a local woman were arrested on charges of alleged forced religious conversion. The women said that, despite approaching the Commission to seek action against Bajrang Dal members for harassment, they were subjected instead to victim-blaming, insensitive questioning, and political bias.

Below is a breakdown of the main issues:

1. Victim-Blaming and Insensitive Questioning During the Hearing: Commission members directed accusatory questions at the complainants, treating them as if they were the accused rather than supporting victims of sexual harassment.

Mocking their religious beliefs with questions like, "If you go to churches and temples, why don’t you go to mosques?" This was described as insulting and a violation of constitutional rights to freedom of conscience.

Questioning why they didn’t seek work locally in Narayanpur, implying fault in their decision to travel for employment.

Asking if they informed the police about travelling to Agra for work, which is irrelevant for adult women exercising their freedom of movement.

Accusing them of taking money from the church, suggesting ulterior motives.

Pressuring them through repeated insinuations that their statements were fabricated or scripted by others.

Affirming unproven allegations of forced religious conversion and involvement of nuns, without evidence.

These actions left the young women traumatised.

02. Failure to Take Action Against the Accused: Despite prima facie video evidence of abuse by named individuals (Jyoti Sharma, Ravi Nigam, and Ratan Yadav), no FIR has been filed.

The Commission did not direct the police to register an FIR or investigate the railway police officials involved, who are directly implicated.

Local police have also failed to act, exacerbating the victims' vulnerability.

03. Political Bias and Misuse of the Commission's Mandate: The questioning appears "politically motivated and based on flawed reasoning," suggesting the Commission is aligning with a political agenda rather than acting autonomously.

This misuses the trust placed in the Commission by complainants and undermines its purpose as an institution established through women's struggles to deliver justice free from government or political interference.

The Commission's behaviour seems to protect the accused (including police personnel) instead of the victims, who come from poor tribal families relying on their courage alone.

04. Damage to the Commission's Credibility and Purpose: This seriously harms the Commission's reputation as a body meant to ensure justice for women, especially marginalised groups like tribal women.

This handling contradicts the legal duties of the Commission to intervene in serious cases involving evidence, police involvement, and vulnerable victims.

05. Broader Systemic Failures in Protecting Vulnerable Women: The victims' socioeconomic background (poor tribal families) makes the inaction particularly urgent, as they lack resources to seek justice independently.

No provision of support, such as compensation, or punishment for guilty parties, leaving the women without redress.

Immediate corrective actions are required:

• FIR should be filed against the accused.
• Guilty policemen should be punished.
• The victim women should be given proper compensation.
• The dignity and impartiality of the Women's Commission should be restored.

Overall, there is a systemic breakdown in institutional support for sexual harassment victims, compounded by bias and negligence.

By Navneet Chand