I saw this on the BBC. I kept looking for some kind of rationale, like maybe he had head lice and it was a threat to a community with so many people in such a tight space. Setting entirely aside that issue, I figured, there had to be a good reason. Nope. At least the BBC did not give one.
So then wouldn't it just come down to assault? Assault does not have to 'hurt'. It just means unwanted touching. (If it does hurt, that's called 'assault and battery.' Battering a person meaning to hurt them in some way.) So I suppose they have justifications for that as well, but it wouldn't have to involve religion. And might be harder to prove/win.