Nashik Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail To Danish Shaikh In TCS Conversion Case, Cites 'Wide Social Repercussions'

Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) V.V. Kathare passed the order on April 21.

The applicant had sought protection from arrest in Crime No. 166 of 2026, invoking offences under Sections 299, 302, 75, 79 and 3(5) of the BNS. The applicant is already lodged in Central Jail, Nashik in connection with another case.

As per the prosecution version, the complainant, an employee of a private company in Nashik, alleged that the applicant and a co-accused, both colleagues at TCS, had since 2022 made repeated remarks targeting his religious beliefs. It was alleged that they used offensive language against Hindu religious sentiments while praising another religion, and questioned the validity of his faith, thereby causing deep hurt to his religious feelings.

The FIR further alleged that the accused pressured the complainant to read the Quran and consume non-vegetarian food against his wishes. It was also alleged that they subjected him to harassment at the workplace, including sending adverse reports to senior officials, humiliating him in front of colleagues, and issuing threats of dire consequences. Allegations of sexually coloured remarks against women employees were also part of the complaint.

Opposing the plea, the prosecution informed the court that multiple FIRs, including serious allegations of rape and workplace sexual harassment, are registered against the applicant and co-accused. It was further submitted that a Special Investigation Team has been constituted to probe the matter, and the National Commission for Women has also taken cognisance of the allegations, underscoring the gravity of the case.

The prosecution argued that custodial interrogation may be necessary given the ongoing investigation and multiple connected cases.

The applicant, through counsel, argued that the alleged offences carry a punishment of less than seven years and that he had no prior criminal antecedents. It was also submitted that no recovery was required and that custodial detention would not serve any purpose.

However, the court observed that the FIR discloses deliberate acts intended to outrage religious sentiments and that the allegations cannot be viewed in isolation in light of the applicant’s alleged criminal antecedents. The court also noted that the alleged conduct has wider implications affecting public order and communal harmony.

Holding that the investigation is still in its early stage, the court observed that releasing the applicant at this juncture could hamper the ongoing probe. The application was therefore rejected.

The matter has been listed for further hearing on April 27, 2026, and the concerned police station has been directed to be informed of the order.