A court in Nashik has rejected the anticipatory bail plea of Nida Khan in a case involving allegations of hurting religious sentiments and attempted forced religious conversion at a Tata Consultancy Services office, marking a key development in an investigation that is still expanding in scope.
The order was delivered by the Nashik Road court following in-camera hearings conducted on April 29, where both the prosecution and defence presented their arguments in detail. The state was represented by Special Public Prosecutor Ajay Mishra, while advocate Rahul Kasliwal appeared on behalf of the accused. The investigation team’s position was placed before the court by ACP Sandeep Mitke, who opposed the bail plea and emphasised the need for continued custodial interrogation.
The prosecution argued that the allegations against Khan are serious and involve deliberate attempts to influence the complainant. According to the case presented, the accused allegedly introduced the victim to specific religious practices, encouraged behavioural changes such as adopting particular attire, and facilitated access to religious content through mobile applications and shared digital links. It was further claimed that the victim’s identity was altered and that key documents related to the matter were held by another accused individual.
Investigators informed the court that multiple items, including books and other materials linked to the case, had been seized and would form part of the evidence. Digital records—such as mobile communications, along with statements from the complainant and family members—are also being examined as part of the case file.
The prosecution additionally indicated that the investigation is exploring broader connections, including possible links to Malegaon and an alleged international angle involving Malaysia, where inducements such as employment opportunities may have been offered. Authorities also told the court that aspects related to coercion, influence, and potential pressure tactics are still under scrutiny.
The defence had earlier argued for anticipatory bail, but the court, after reserving its decision, declined relief to the accused. The rejection of the plea underscores the court’s view that the matter requires further investigation, with authorities continuing to examine evidence and establish the full extent of the allegations.
