In 1692, the legal court of Galata received an order from the imperial palace that asked the judge to conduct an inspection of two houses in Sultan Bayezid neighborhood belonging to non-Muslim Ottoman subjects named Dimitri and Agya. The court sent an investigative team to the neighborhood, where a hearing took place in the presence of Muslim residents. Leading members of the Muslim community, including the imam and people composed mainly of seyyids as well as pilgrims, sued Dimitri and Agya on the grounds that their houses were located in the Muslim neighborhood and had historically belonged to Muslims. They also stated that it could be observed that the houses were surrounded by and adjacent to Muslim houses and were located far from the houses of the infidel community. Contrary to the law, they had bought these houses from Muslims and had been practicing their superstitious rituals (ayin-i küfri) there. They argued that these z?mmis were causing collective harm to residents of the neighborhood and demanded a legal solution. In accordance with these testimonies, the court ruled in favor of the eviction of Dimitri and Agya and the selling of their houses to Muslims on the grounds that non-Muslims were banned from settling in Muslim neighborhoods. This paper provides a sociocultural and legal analysis of changing intercommunal dynamics in seventeenth-century Istanbul with a specific emphasis on its religiously and ethnically most diverse district, Galata. By utilizing extensive unpublished legal court records belonging to the courts of Istanbul and Galata, I demonstrate that, in relation to the increasing religiosity of the time, the religious identities of neighborhoods became more contested. The process led to heightened pressure on non-Muslims at the neighborhood level and many non-Muslims were evicted from neighborhoods on the basis of their religious identity. While increasing orthodoxy and its implications have been noted in the relevant historiography, most studies have made use of catechisms, the writings of religious literati, and conversion narratives. My analysis goes beyond the official discourse and state programs in favor of understanding actual manifestations of increased religiosity and its impact on social and communal dynamics. I particularly emphasize communal demands and pressure from below and demonstrate the roles of ordinary Ottoman subjects as active participants and players in these processes, rather than as passive recipients of the programs imposed upon them.