Minor Hindu girl lured, blackmailed with obscene videos for marriage by Muslim man posing as Hindu in Baghpat

Case ID : 30a7596 | Location : Baghpat, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Thu, 19 March, 2026

Case ID : 30a7596

Baghpat, Uttar Pradesh, India

19 March, 2026

Minor Hindu girl lured, blackmailed with obscene videos for marriage by Muslim man posing as Hindu in Baghpat

Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes

Man pretends to be Hindu

Brainwashed and/or groomed

Rape and sexual assault/harassment

Case Summary

In the Chhaprauli police station area of Baraut, Baghpat district, Uttar Pradesh, a minor Hindu girl aged 17 was befriended and lured into a relationship by a Muslim man posing as a Hindu. The accused drugged the victim, shot obscene videos of her and then exploited her financially and forced her to marry him. According to media reports, the incident came to light when the victim’s family filed a police complaint on 20 March 2026. The accused Muslim youth, a resident of Hathwala, Haryana, had befriended the victim on Instagram. He pretended to be a Hindu and lured her into his love trap. The victim stated that the accused took her to his home, where he mixed a sedative into her tea. He then made an obscene video of the victim. After all this, the accused, threatening to make the video viral, extorted approximately ₹3.50 lakh in cash and a pair of earrings from the Hindu victim. He also continuously pressured the Hindu girl to marry him. At the time of writing this report, the Chhaprauli police station had registered a case against the accused and had begun an investigation. The in‑charge of Chhaprauli police station, Ashish Pundir, stated that a case had been registered against the accused and that the matter was being investigated. If found guilty in the investigation, strict action would be taken against the accused.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case is being added to the tracker under the primary category- Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes. The subcategory selected is- Man pretends to be Hindu. When a non-Hindu man pretends to be a Hindu to deceive a Hindu woman into a relationship, the act is seen as triggered by malafide intentions. In some cases, the woman eventually accepts the man’s original religious identity and converts after the man’s identity is revealed. These cases could be argued as cases of religious brainwashing and a result of the pressure a woman feels after getting into a relationship with a man. The woman, it can be argued, also changed her religious identity because of the stigma she believes she might face if she chooses to walk out of a deceptive relationship. However, for the purpose of documenting hate crimes, the cases in this subcategory are limited to those where there is explicit violence aimed at religious conversion against the wishes of the victim (force-feeding beef, blackmailing with intimate videos, rape on refusal to convert, etc), or if the woman herself complains of the man’s religious deception. In such cases, it is established that the deception of the non-Hindu man had a specific aim of religious conversion or targeting of the victim due to her Hindu religious identity, therefore, making it a religiously motivated hate crime. The other subcategory selected is- Brainwashed and/or Groomed. The tertiary category selected is- Rape and sexual assault/harassment. In our database, we have not added incidents where women have converted to another religion of their free will and no allegations of forced/involuntary conversion have been made. However, there are certain cases of conversion where the consent itself is a result of the brainwashing or grooming of a minor by the non-Hindu perpetrator trying to victimise a woman for her Hindu religious identity. The phenomenon of grooming points to non-Hindu perpetrators identifying their Hindu victims’ vulnerabilities and exploiting them over months and sometimes years, to extract the supposed ‘consent’ in order to convert their religion. In most cases of grooming, the victims are minors or the grooming started when the victim was a minor. In other cases of grooming, the non-Hindu perpetrator brainwashes and grooms a minor victim to extract their trust and then proceeds to rape them repeatedly with the intent of converting them to their faith. It is pertinent to understand here that when the victim is a minor, the ‘consent’ to convert or enter into a romantic relationship with an adult itself is redundant – addressed by POCSO. While every case of conversion of a minor and incidents of establishing a physical relationship with a minor by an adult is a crime, for the purpose of this database, a case would be considered a hate crime only if there is a distinct religious angle to the grooming. For example, in the UK, if a Hindu minor is targeted by Pakistani grooming gangs, it would be considered a hate crime because the victims are specifically targeted owing to their non-Muslim religious identity with the perpetrators being Muslim. In other cases, if a Hindu minor is brainwashed into entering a physical relationship with the non-Hindu adult perpetrator and the family alleges grooming/brainwashing of the minor to convert her religion, it would form a part of this database. If the victim is a Hindu adult, the case would form a part of this database only if the victim herself says that she was brainwashed/groomed to convert her religion. However, if the victim is deceased (murdered or otherwise), the case would form a part of this database if her family/friends provided testimony that the victim was brainwashed/groomed to convert her religion. Since these crimes have a distinct religious angle where the victim is being targeted owing to her Hindu religious identity, these cases are considered a hate crime. This case is a clear example of a religiously motivated hate crime, as a minor Hindu girl was lured into a relationship, drugged, had obscene videos recorded of her and was then subjected to blackmail by a Muslim man posing as a Hindu. First, it is important to address the fact that the victim is a minor. This means that the element of genuine consent and informed change of conscience was absent from the outset. Minors, due to their young age and lack of emotional and intellectual maturity, are especially vulnerable to manipulation and coercion. They may not fully grasp the nature of religious deception or the predatory strategies at play. The Muslim perpetrator deliberately targeted and exploited this vulnerability of a minor Hindu girl, using false promises of love and marriage to ensnare her. Since this case features the use of coercion, deceit and psychological pressure to achieve religious exploitation, it amounts to a clear act of religiously motivated offence. Second, the perpetrator’s act of posing as a Hindu demonstrates a clear bias and malicious intent towards the victim’s religion. By concealing his true identity, the Muslim man deliberately manipulated the Hindu girl’s trust and approached her under false pretences, indicating a premeditated plan to exploit her because of her religious background. This violated her right to informed consent regarding whom she chooses to love, as well as undermined her religious beliefs and identity. The perpetrator’s decision to hide his religious identity strongly underscores the religious motive behind the crime, transforming what might superficially appear as an individual deception into a targeted attack on the Hindu victim and her faith identity. In such cases, identity concealment is not merely a personal tactic of dishonesty but a calculated strategy rooted in religious profiling and targeting. The accused was aware that the victim, being Hindu, would likely refuse his advances if she had known his real identity, and he circumvented this by lying. This deliberate deception reflects a broader pattern in which Hindu women are singled out by Muslim men using false identities, often with the intent of coercion, humiliation or forced conversion. Such targeted victimisation based on religion not only shows a fundamental disregard for Hinduism but also reveals a deeper animosity towards the Hindu community as a whole. The fact that the accused drugged the minor girl and then filmed obscene videos of her further illustrates that his intent was not limited to personal gratification but included the systematic sexual exploitation of a Hindu child. By using drugs to render her helpless, the perpetrator stripped her of agency and turned her into a tool of humiliation designed to wound her religious identity and self‑respect. The act of recording and threatening to circulate a private video was not merely about sexual abuse but about leveraging shame and fear to dominate and belittle her as a Hindu girl. This transformation of her body and image into instruments of coercion and exposure underscores that the exploitation was driven by religious hostility, making it a hate‑driven crime against Hindu identity. The subsequent blackmail, in which the accused demanded money and forced the victim into marriage, further exposes his predatory and religiously hostile mindset. He leveraged the threat of releasing the video to extort approximately ₹3.50 lakh and personal ornaments from the Hindu girl, while simultaneously pressuring her to marry him, effectively attempting to trap her in a religiously coerced union. This combination of financial exploitation, sexual abuse and forced marriage demonstrates that the perpetrator’s motive was not only to profit from her vulnerability but also to assert control over her life and religious identity, inflicting long‑term psychological trauma and social stigma on a minor Hindu girl. Such behaviour fits the pattern of predatory targeting of Hindu women and minor girls through deception, marriage pressure and economic blackmail. Given that this case meets the parameters of a religiously motivated hate crime against Hindus, it is added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records the date of an incident based on when the victim’s ordeal begins, rather than when the case is reported in the media. In this particular case, however, media reports do not specify any date for when the victim’s ordeal started; they mention only 20 March 2026, which is the date on which the victim’s family filed a police complaint. In the absence of a clearly stated start date for the victim’s abuse, the Hinduphobia Tracker has provisionally adopted 20 March 2026 as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes only.