TCS Conversion Case: Nashik Court Rejects Nida Khan’s Anticipatory Bail
Nashik court rejects anticipatory bail plea of Nida Khan in TCS harassment and alleged religious conversion case
A Court in Nashik on Saturday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of Nida Khan, who is facing allegations of sexual harassment and forcible religious conversion at the Nashik unit of Tata Consultancy Services.
The order was passed by Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) KG Joshi.
As per news reports, Public Prosecutor Ajay Misar informed that the court found the allegations serious and emphasised the necessity of custodial interrogation. “The offence is serious. Nida Khan is one of the prime accused and therefore her custodial interrogation is necessary,” he said, adding that the detailed order would be uploaded shortly.
As per the FIR, Khan is accused of advising women employees to dress and conduct themselves in accordance with Islamic traditions, among other allegations forming part of the case.
Earlier, on April 27, the Court had reserved the order in the bail plea. The Nashik police had opposed the anticipatory bail plea of Nida Khan before a trial court, asserting that the accused; described as absconding in the alleged TCS sexual exploitation and forced religious conversion case, must be subjected to custodial interrogation.
Appearing for the prosecution, the police had submitted that crucial aspects of the investigation remained incomplete and required Khan’s custody. “Her financial links need to be probed. Certain links with Malaysia and Malegaon were found. Her phone needs to be sent for forensic investigation,” the prosecution told the court, as per reports.
According to the police, the case involves allegations that the victim’s identity was altered, with her name allegedly changed to ‘Haniya’, and that religious content, including reels, was uploaded on her Instagram account as part of the alleged acts.
Khan’s counsel, Advocate Rahul Kasliwal, opposed the plea for custodial interrogation, arguing that the legal framework in Maharashtra does not criminalise religious conversion in the same manner as some other states. He contended that there was no specific statutory bar on conversions and maintained that the investigation could proceed without arrest. The defence had further submitted that multiple FIRs arising out of the same set of allegations could be consolidated and investigated together, asserting that custodial interrogation was unnecessary in the circumstances.
The matter was heard in-camera, with both sides completing their submissions before the court.
On April 20, the Court had refused to grant interim protection from arrest to accused Nida Ejaz Khan. The anticipatory bail application, filed on April 18 through Advocates Baba Sayyad and Rahul Kasliwal, also sought interim relief pending final adjudication. However, the Court had declined to grant any such protection.
The charges invoked include Sections 69 (sexual intercourse obtained under false promise of marriage), 75 (sexual harassment), 299 (insulting religious beliefs), and 3(5) (common intention) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Complainants have alleged that they were subjected to inappropriate physical contact, sexually coloured remarks, and coercion, including threats of increased workload if they did not comply. Some victims have also alleged attempts to influence their religious beliefs, including claims that Islam was portrayed as superior to Hinduism and derogatory remarks were made about Hindu deities.
Taking cognisance of media reports, the National Commission for Women (NCW) has initiated a suo motu inquiry into the matter. The Commission has constituted a fact-finding committee comprising retired Bombay High Court judge Justice Sadhna Jadhav, former IPS officer BK Sinha, Advocate Monika Arora, and senior NCW coordinator Lilabati.
The committee has been tasked with conducting an on-ground inquiry at the TCS Nashik facility and any other relevant locations. It will examine the circumstances leading to the alleged incidents, assess the response of authorities, and recommend measures to prevent recurrence and strengthen workplace safety for women. The committee has been given the flexibility to determine its own procedure and schedule, but has been directed to submit its report within ten working days.
Bench: ASJ KG Joshi
Order Date: May 2, 2026