Hindu minor girl lured from school, drugged, raped and forcibly converted before attempted marriage by Muslim man

Case ID : 30a8007 | Location : Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Thu, 23 April, 2026

Case ID : 30a8007

Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India

23 April, 2026

Hindu minor girl lured from school, drugged, raped and forcibly converted before attempted marriage by Muslim man

Predatory Proselytisation

Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination

Conversion of minor

Rape and sexual assault/harassment

Family claims grooming

Case Summary

A Hindu minor girl from Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, was taken away from outside her school and subjected to sexual assault and coercion. She was lured under the pretext of marriage and transported out of the city. What followed involved forced religious conversion, intoxication, and repeated acts carried out against her will. On 21st April 2026, the Hindu girl was dropped at her school in the Sigra area of Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, by her brother. Shortly after he left, a Muslim man identified as Mohammad Rustam, a resident of Nadesar, arrived at the location. The Hindu girl had prior acquaintance with him. He persuaded her to accompany him on the pretext of going for a walk. He then took her out of Varanasi to Ambedkar Nagar. During this journey, he continued to assure her of marriage. Upon reaching Ambedkar Nagar, he took her to a shrine. There, under the pretext of offering her water, he administered intoxicants to her, causing her to lose control over her faculties. Following this, he proceeded to forcibly convert the Hindu girl’s religion against her will. He assigned her a Muslim name, Afreen Bano, and continued to pressure her to accept this new identity. On the same day, he arranged for the creation of a forged Aadhaar card in that name. He then booked a hotel room in Ambedkar Nagar and took her there. In the hotel room, he raped her while she was in a drugged and vulnerable state. During the assault, the Hindu minor girl lost consciousness. The acts were carried out without her consent and under conditions where she was unable to resist. On the following day, he took her to the Ambedkar Nagar district court along with associates. There, he attempted to conduct a court marriage using fabricated documents reflecting her coerced identity and conversion. During the proceedings, the Hindu girl raised an alarm. A lawyer present at the court premises became suspicious and intervened. As questions were raised, the Muslim man fled the scene. Meanwhile, on 21st April 2026, the Hindu girl’s family had filed a missing person complaint at Sigra police station in Varanasi. On 22nd April 2026, the police located her and returned her to her family. After returning home, she disclosed the full sequence of events to her family. She described being taken to Ambedkar Nagar, being given intoxicants at a shrine, being forcibly converted and renamed, and being raped in a hotel room. She also informed them about the attempt to compel her into a court marriage using false documents. On 23rd April 2026, her family submitted a fresh written complaint at Sigra police station detailing the acts of coercion, sexual assault, and forced religious conversion. The complaint specified the involvement of Mohammad Rustam and outlined the sequence of events beginning from outside the school to the incident in Ambedkar Nagar. Following the complaint, the police registered a case under sections 64(1), 87, and 123 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, along with sections 3 and 5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, 2021. The Muslim perpetrator, Mohammad Rustam, was arrested by Sigra police and sent to judicial custody. Police teams, including officers from the local outpost and Sigra police station, carried out the arrest operation. The accused was produced before the court and remanded to jail. The investigation remained ongoing to examine the use of forged identity documents, the circumstances of the attempted court marriage, and the full sequence of events across Varanasi and Ambedkar Nagar.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category - Predatory proselytisation. Within this, the subcategory selected is - Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination. Under this the tertiary categories selected are Conversion of minor, Rape and sexual assault/harassment, and Family claims grooming. Religious brainwashing essentially means the often subtle and forcible indoctrination to induce someone to give up their religious beliefs to accept contrasting regimented ideas. Religious grooming or brainwashing also involves propaganda and manipulation. It involves the systematic effort, driven by religious malice and indoctrination, to persuade “non-believers’ to accept allegiance, command, or doctrine to and of a contrasting faith. Cases of such grooming or brainwashing are far more nuanced than direct threats, coercion, inducement and violence. In such cases, it is often seen that there is repeated, subtle and continual manipulation of the victim to induce disaffection towards their own faith and acceptance of the contrasting faith of the perpetrator. While subtle indoctrination is widely acknowledged as predatory, an element which is often understated in such conversions or the attempts of such conversion is the role of loyalty and trust which might develop between the perpetrator and the victim. Fiduciary relationships are often abused to affect such religious conversion. For example, an educator transmitting religious doctrine of a competing faith to a Hindu student. The Hindu student is likely to accept what the teacher is transmitting owing to existence of the fiduciary relationship. The exploitation of the fiduciary relationship to religiously indoctrinate victims would also be included in this category. Since the underlying animosity towards the victim’s faith forms the basis of predatory proselytization, such cases are considered religiously motivated hate crimes. This case qualified as a religiously motivated hate crime due to the deliberate targeting of a minor Hindu girl by a Muslim perpetrator through deception, coercion, and sexual violence. The perpetrator did not act randomly but selected a Hindu minor and systematically manipulated her into a situation where her religious identity could be altered. The sequence of grooming, forced conversion and renaming, attempted marriage using forged identity documents, and sexual assault demonstrated a clear pattern where religion was central to the acts committed. Each stage of the incident showed conscious choices designed to weaken, replace, and erase the Hindu identity of the victim. The primary religious marker was the deliberate grooming and manipulation of the minor Hindu girl as an easier target. The perpetrator established contact with her and built familiarity over time, presenting himself as someone trustworthy. This created emotional reliance and lowered her guard. For a Hindu girl, especially a minor, interpersonal trust is shaped by social and cultural expectations of safety within known relationships. The perpetrator exploited this by concealing his intent and using the promise of companionship and marriage as tools of manipulation. This was not an incidental interaction but a calculated process of conditioning the minor into compliance. The fact that the victim was a child further amplified her vulnerability, making her more susceptible to influence, pressure, and deception. Minors, due to their young age and lack of maturity, are particularly vulnerable to manipulation and coercion. They may not have the ability to fully understand the implications of converting to another religion, and the Muslim perpetrator purposely targeted and exploited this vulnerability of the victim. By grooming a minor Hindu girl, he ensured reduced resistance and greater control, revealing clear intent to target her specifically because she was both Hindu and a child, using deception as a preparatory tool for religious and physical exploitation. The second religious marker was the forced conversion of a minor through identity erasure and imposition. The perpetrator changed the Hindu girl’s name to Afreen Bano and proceeded to create forged identity documents, including an Aadhaar card, reflecting this imposed identity. For an individual, a name is not merely administrative but is tied to family lineage, cultural continuity, and religious belonging. By renaming her and formalising it through documents, the perpetrator attempted to institutionalise the erasure of her Hindu identity. He further attempted to conduct a court marriage using these false documents, which would have legally cemented the conversion. This was not a spontaneous act but a structured effort to permanently alter the identity of a Hindu child. The use of documentation and legal mechanisms showed premeditation and intent to make the conversion irreversible. This revealed a deliberate attempt to target her as a Hindu minor and replace her religious identity entirely. The third religious marker was the use of sexual violence as a tool of control following coercion and conversion. The perpetrator administered intoxicants to the minor Hindu girl at a shrine, rendering her unconscious and incapable of resistance. He then raped her in a hotel room while she was in a vulnerable state. For a woman, bodily autonomy and dignity are deeply tied to personal and familial honour. By first disorienting her through intoxicants and then committing sexual assault, the perpetrator ensured complete physical and psychological domination. This was not an isolated act of violence but was carried out immediately after forcing a change in her religious identity, linking the assault to the broader sequence of coercion. The timing and method demonstrate that the sexual violence was used to reinforce control after conversion, ensuring submission and preventing resistance. This choice revealed intent to target the Hindu victim in a manner that combined religious coercion with physical violation, maximising harm both to her identity and her bodily integrity. When the minor Hindu girl went missing on 21st April 2026, her family immediately initiated a search and filed a complaint. After she was found on 22nd April 2026, she disclosed the full sequence of events, including grooming, forced conversion, renaming, and sexual assault. Knowing that such harm would extend beyond the victim to her family’s sense of security, honour, and continuity. The family’s response showed that the incident was understood as targeted and severe. On 23rd April 2026, they filed a formal complaint detailing the sequence of coercion, assault, and forced religious acts. This demonstrated that the perpetrator’s conduct was sustained, intentional, and visible in its impact. It was not hidden or incidental but severe enough to compel immediate legal action. The choice to target a minor Hindu girl ensured that the harm would resonate at both an individual and familial level, reflecting a calculated intent to impose control in a manner that would have lasting and irreversible consequences. This incident is not an isolated case but part of a broader pattern where Hindu girls/women are deliberately targeted through deception for religious conversion and sexual exploitation. This stems from inherent hostility towards the victim's professed faith since Abrahamic faiths believe that any non-adherent to the faith is subject to being dehumanised till they convert. Such predatory actions stem from doctrinal animosity towards the Hindu faith and its adherents. Given that this case met the parameters of a religiously motivated hate crime, it was added to the hate crime database of the tracker. Disclaimer: The exact date of initial contact between the Hindu girl and the Muslim perpetrator was not specified, as they were acquainted prior to the abduction. The tracker records incident dates based on when the crime occurred rather than when it was reported or published. In the absence of a confirmed start date, 24 April 2026, the article publication date was used as the indicative incident date. This was recorded for documentation purposes only.