Hindu woman exploited by Muslim man through deceptive relationship, intimate footage used as weapon to demand conversion to Islam

Case ID : 30a80f8 | Location : | Date of Incident : Tue, 26 November, 2024

Case ID : 30a80f8

26 November, 2024

Hindu woman exploited by Muslim man through deceptive relationship, intimate footage used as weapon to demand conversion to Islam

Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes

Brainwashed and/or groomed

Rape and sexual assault/harassment

Family claims grooming

Blackmailed to convert

Assault or threat upon refusal to convert

Case Summary

A 19-year-old Hindu woman from a village in Lucknow district, Uttar Pradesh was groomed into a relationship by a Muslim man named Mansub Ahmad from Pauli village, subjected to sexual exploitation, filmed without consent, blackmailed with the footage for approximately one and a half years, and then pressured to convert to Islam under threat of having the video made public and her family killed. The case came to light when her mother found her crying at home and she disclosed the full account of what had been done to her. Mansub Ahmad was arrested and sent to jail on court orders. Mansub Ahmad identified the Hindu woman and drew her into a relationship through deception. He used the relationship to engage in sexual activity with her and recorded compromising photographs and videos of her without her informed consent. Over approximately one and a half years, he used this material to systematically blackmail and sexually exploit her. The victim endured the exploitation in silence, her father being absent from the home for work as a labourer. Mansub Ahmad subsequently began using the recorded material to pressure the Hindu woman to convert to Islam, threatening to make the video public if she refused. When she refused his conversion demands, he threatened to circulate the video and kill her family. The sustained blackmail, sexual exploitation, conversion pressure, and death threats continued for an extended period before the victim's family became aware of what was happening. The case came to light when the victim's mother found her crying at home. When questioned, the woman disclosed the full account of what had been done to her over the preceding one and a half years. Her mother filed a written complaint with police. Station in-charge Vidya Prakash Singh confirmed that a First Information Report [FIR] had been registered against Mansub Ahmad under Information Technology [IT] Act provisions and sections related to forced conversion, and that an investigation was underway. Mansub Ahmad was arrested from Pauli Gate Malihabad and sent to jail on court orders.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The primary category for this case is "Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes". The sub-category for this case is "Brainwashed and/or groomed". The tertiary category for the case is "Rape and sexual assault/harassment" and "Family claims grooming". 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. Another sub-category for this case is "Blackmailed to convert". When Hindu women are in a relationship with non-Hindu men, there are cases where the woman is blackmailed to convert her religion, owing to her religious identity of being a Hindu. Such relationships may be consensual with the religious identity of the non-Hindu man known to the victim, however, there could be cases where the relationship is not consensual and the non-Hindu man starts blackmailing a Hindu woman to convert her religion. In these cases, it is often seen that the Hindu woman is blackmailed with intimate photos and/or videos, threats of harm to her or her family, threats of violence etc. Such cases are driven by specific religious motivations and against the religious identity of the victim and are therefore qualified as hate crimes. One other sub-category that this case qualifies for is "Assault or threat upon refusal to convert". When Hindu women are in a relationship with non-Hindu men, there are cases where the woman faces threats or assault after she refuses to convert and change her religious identity owing to pressure/force by the non-Hindu man. Such relationships may be consensual with the religious identity of the non-Hindu man known to the victim. Somewhere along the relationship, the non-Hindu man starts pressurizing the Hindu woman to convert to Islam and upon her refusal, assaults or threatens the victim. Such cases are driven by specific religious motivations and against the religious identity of the victim and are therefore qualified as hate crimes. Cases where the Hindu woman converts to Islam and does not file a complaint about the force or threat, are not considered a part of the hate tracker, even though, it may be argued that the woman was brainwashed or threatened to convert to Islam. This case qualifies as a religiously motivated hate crime in which a Muslim man named Mansub Ahmad in Lucknow district, Uttar Pradesh deliberately groomed a 19-year-old Hindu woman into a relationship, recorded compromising material without her consent, blackmailed her with that material for approximately one and a half years, and then used the footage as a weapon to pressure her to convert to Islam, threatening to kill her family when she refused. The crime was structured around the deliberate targeting of a Hindu woman through manufactured trust, the weaponisation of her most intimate vulnerability, and the explicit demand that she abandon her Hindu faith as the price of her family's safety. The deliberate grooming of a Hindu woman through a deceptive relationship is the primary religious marker of this case. Mansub Ahmad did not approach the Hindu woman openly or honestly. He identified her and cultivated a relationship through sustained deception, manufacturing the emotional trust necessary to gain access to her person before deploying that trust against her. The grooming was the precondition the perpetrator constructed deliberately to gain access to a Hindu woman who would not otherwise have been vulnerable to him. He chose this specific Hindu woman as his target and invested time in manufacturing her trust because she was Hindu, and because her Hindu identity made her a specifically valued target for the conversion demand he intended to make once he had secured sufficient leverage over her. The non-consensual recording of intimate material and its use as a blackmail instrument is the second religious marker. Mansub Ahmad recorded compromising photographs and videos of the Hindu woman without her informed consent and immediately weaponised this material as a tool of sustained blackmail and sexual exploitation over approximately one and a half years. The non-consensual recording was not incidental to the relationship. It was a premeditated step in a structured campaign of coercion, carried out specifically to create leverage over a Hindu woman whose social reputation and family honour could be held hostage by the existence of the footage. The perpetrator understood that a Hindu woman's vulnerability to social stigma was the specific pressure point that would most effectively neutralise her resistance to his demands, and he exploited it deliberately and systematically over an extended period. After approximately one and a half years of blackmail and sexual exploitation, Mansub Ahmad escalated his demands and began using the footage specifically to pressure the Hindu woman to convert to Islam. The transition from sexual exploitation to conversion demand was not a separate crime but a continuation of the same structured campaign of coercion, with the blackmail material now deployed as the instrument through which religious transformation was to be compelled. The perpetrator chose to make the conversion demand at this specific point because he had already established total control over the Hindu woman through one and a half years of blackmail and exploitation, ensuring that his religious demand was made from a position of maximum leverage and her position of maximum vulnerability. The death threats against her family issued in response to her refusal to convert is the fourth religious marker. When the Hindu woman refused his conversion demands, Mansub Ahmad threatened to circulate the video publicly and kill her family. The death threats were issued specifically and directly in response to her maintained Hindu identity and her refusal to abandon it. The choice to threaten her family rather than herself alone reflects a calculated understanding of the specific vulnerabilities of a Hindu woman in a close-knit family structure. By making her family's lives the price of her continued refusal to convert, he extended the coercion beyond her own person and into the most intimate relationships of her life, ensuring that the weight of her decision to maintain her Hindu faith was measured in the potential deaths of those she loved most. The conduct of the perpetrator reflected more than a personal criminal exploitation. By deliberately grooming a Hindu woman through manufactured trust, recording her without consent, blackmailing her for one and a half years, and then deploying the blackmail material as a weapon to demand her conversion to Islam while threatening to kill her family when she refused, his actions demonstrated a clear and deliberate disregard for her Hindu religious identity and her right to maintain that identity freely. The Hindu woman was targeted specifically because she was Hindu, and every instrument of coercion he deployed was chosen because it would be most effective in compelling a Hindu woman to abandon her faith under conditions of total vulnerability and isolation. This reflects an underlying hostility toward Hindu religious identity that cannot be characterised as anything other than religiously motivated. 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 Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when the crime occurred rather than when it was reported or published. This case involves a sustained course of conduct beginning approximately one and a half years before the publication date of 27 April 2026, placing the start of the grooming and exploitation at approximately November 2024. The date of 27 November 2024 has been used as the primary incident date for documentation purposes, derived by aligning the known year and month with the article publication date, reflecting the approximate start of the criminal conduct. This was recorded for documentation purposes only.