Hindu woman attempted self immolation after years of sustained conversion pressure within marriage by Muslim family, her children converted
Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India 
10 June, 2026
Case Summary
A Hindu woman in Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, reached a point of extreme distress after facing sustained pressure to abandon her faith and convert to another religion. She arrived at the Collectorate with her children seeking intervention and relief. The situation escalated dramatically when she poured petrol on herself inside the Collectorate premises before she could meet district officials. Her actions drew immediate attention to the circumstances she said had pushed her to take such a desperate step. The Hindu woman, identified as Pooja Sen, had married a Muslim man, Guddu Qureshi, a resident of Babina, approximately 17 years earlier. The couple had three children, including two sons and a 16-year-old daughter. Over the years, the marriage continued, and the family lived together in the Babina area of Jhansi district. According to the Hindu woman, the situation changed when her husband entered into a relationship with another woman and subsequently married her. Following this development, she and her children were removed from the family home. The Hindu woman stated that after being forced out, she approached her in-laws seeking recognition of her children's rights and support for their future. When she approached her in-laws, she faced hostility because of her Hindu identity. Her brother-in-law drove her away and told her that she was a Hindu. She stated that members of her husband's family repeatedly pressured her to convert to another religion. She further stated that inducements were offered to persuade her to abandon her faith, including assurances that she would be provided with a house if she agreed to convert. The pressure extended beyond her own religious identity. The Hindu woman stated that her two sons had been converted to Islam by her in-laws. She described this as part of the continuing pressure placed upon her and her children within the family environment. The dispute, therefore, involved not only her own faith but also her children's religious identity. The Hindu woman further stated that she had approached Babina Police Station and the office of the Senior Superintendent of Police to seek action on her grievances. She said that despite submitting complaints, no resolution had been provided, and the issues remained unresolved. As a result, she continued to seek intervention from the authorities. A few days before the incident at the Collectorate, the Hindu woman stated that her brother-in-law had invited her to a house in Aramsheen. where he sexually assaulted her. On Thursday, 11th June 2026, the Hindu woman arrived at the Jhansi Collectorate, accompanied by her daughter and one of her sons. She staged a sit-in protest within the premises and sought an opportunity to present her concerns before district officials. Staff members listened to her account and initiated arrangements for her to meet the District Magistrate. While she was being escorted to meet the District Magistrate, the Hindu woman suddenly poured petrol over herself inside the Collectorate premises. The incident caused panic among those present. Officials and police personnel intervened immediately and prevented further harm. Her attempt drew attention to the severity of the distress she said she had experienced. Following the incident, police took the Hindu woman into custody for questioning and began gathering information regarding the circumstances she had described. She was handed over to the Navabad Police Station, where an inquiry into the matter was initiated. Authorities also began examining the complaints she had raised regarding pressure to convert, her removal from the family home, the circumstances involving her children, and the other allegations she presented. The matter remained under investigation at both the police and administrative levels at the time of reporting.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category - Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes. Within this, the selected subcategory is- Forced conversion after marriage. In such cases, a non-Hindu man marries a Hindu woman, and the force/pressure to convert to any Abrahamic faith, like Islam, begins after marriage. In such cases, typically, two patterns emerge. First, when the relationship is consensual, and the religious identity of the perpetrator is known to the Hindu woman in the relationship. The marriage could be under the Special Marriages Act, where neither parties are required to convert their religion for the marriage to be considered legitimate. While the victim in such cases enters matrimony assuming that religious identity is not a barrier, the non-Hindu man starts to pressure the woman to convert her religion after marriage. The second is when the woman gets into a marriage with the man, pretending to share her faith. Later, when the truth is revealed, the man starts pressuring the woman to convert her religion and give up her religious identity. In both situations, there is application of force by the perpetrator, including the denial of the woman’s religious rights. Some of the means by which the woman is forced/pressured to convert include force-feeding beef, being forced to read the Kalma, being forced to wear a hijab, forced to undergo Halala, etc. There are several instances where, after marriage, the woman voluntarily converts to Islam. Such cases are often argued to be a result of religious brainwashing, however, for the purpose of documenting religiously motivated hate crimes, in the absence of the victim complaining of forced conversion, such cases do not form a part of the database. The other subcategory is- Brainwashed and/or groomed, and within this, the tertiary category selected is- Conversion of minor and 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. The other primary category relevant here is - Predatory Proselytisation. Under this, the first subcategory selected is - Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination, and under this, the tertiary categories selected are - Conversion of minor, Rape and sexual assault/harassment. 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. The other subcategory is - Conversion/attempts to convert by inducement. Predatory Proselytisation is not just limited to threat, harassment, force and violence, but it also has contours of stealth. In several cases, the Hindu victim is exploited to convert, with non-Hindus taking advantage of their poverty. In such cases, the Hindu victim who is suffering financially is offered monetary benefits, including lucrative offers for jobs, health treatment, education, etc, to induce the victim into changing his/her religion. In such cases, the religious identity of the victim and the aim to disenfranchise him from his faith form the heart of the crime. Also, taking advantage of and exploiting an individual’s economic vulnerabilities is widely acknowledged as exploitation, forms of which are often penalised by law. Such cases therefore are considered religiously motivated hate crimes since the victim’s religious identity forms the very heart of the crime itself. The other subcategory is- Harassment, threat and coercion for conversion. Harassment covers a wide range of behaviours of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behaviour that demeans, humiliates, and intimidates a person, including threats and coercion. Harassment and threats, in this case, find their root on discriminatory grounds which has the effect of nullifying a person’s rights or infringing upon his freedom to exercise his right specifically owing to the victim’s religious identity. Verbal and physical threats and psychological or physical harassment are often used against Hindu victims because they choose to practice their professed religion. Religious harassment also includes forced and involuntary conversions by harassment, threats or coercion. Coercion includes intimidatory tactics like force-feeding a Hindu victim beef to convert to another religion, forceful circumcision etc. In several cases documented, non-Hindu perpetrators or those who harbour specific animosity towards Hinduism, harass victims simply based on their religious identity. Such cases often also include harassment to ensure the Hindu victim abandons his/her professed religion and adopts the religion of the perpetrator. Such cases where Hindu victims are harassed to convert to the perpetrator’s religion are rooted in animosity towards the victim’s religious identity and are therefore documented as religiously motivated hate crimes. This case qualified as a religiously motivated hate crime because the Hindu woman was subjected to sustained pressure to abandon her faith and convert to another religion within her marital family. The hostility directed towards her was not confined to personal or domestic disputes. Her Hindu identity became a central point of conflict, exclusion, and coercion. The pressure extended beyond the victim herself and encompassed her children, demonstrating a broader effort to transform the religious identity of an entire Hindu family unit. A particularly significant aspect of this case was that the pressure to abandon Hinduism did not stop with the Hindu woman. It extended to her children, who were also drawn into the process of religious conversion. This is important because children are especially vulnerable to influence, dependency, and authority exercised by adults around them. The conversion of the children demonstrated that the objective was not simply to alter the faith of one individual but to reshape the religious identity of the next generation as well. The targeting of both the Hindu mother and her children revealed a sustained effort to weaken and ultimately erase their connection to their inherited Hindu identity. Such conduct carried profound religious significance because it sought to sever the family's continuity with its faith, traditions, and cultural heritage. The fact that conversion pressure encompassed the entire family unit demonstrates that Hindu identity itself became the focus of the coercion rather than any isolated personal disagreement. The involvement of minor children further strengthened the religious dimension of the case. Minors are not in a position to freely evaluate the consequences of religious conversion in the same way as adults. They are more susceptible to pressure, emotional dependence, and family authority. Efforts to alter the religious identity of children are therefore particularly significant because they target individuals who are least capable of exercising independent choice. By extending conversion efforts to the victim's sons, the perpetrators demonstrated an intention that went beyond influencing one Hindu woman. The conduct reflected a desire to ensure that the children would also be removed from their Hindu roots and absorbed into a different religious identity. This transformed the matter from a dispute affecting one individual into a broader attempt to alter the faith of multiple Hindu family members. The sexual assault suffered by the Hindu woman at the hands of her Muslim brother in law further illustrated the extent of the abuse she endured within an environment already characterised by religious hostility and conversion pressure. Sexual violence is not only an attack on physical integrity but also an attack on personal dignity, bodily autonomy, and security. In this case, the assault occurred within a wider pattern in which the victim's Hindu identity had already become a source of exclusion, discrimination, and coercion. The abuse demonstrated the extent to which she had been stripped of protection and respect within the family structure. Hindu woman within such circumstances demonstrated the degree of vulnerability she faced because of her position within a family that was simultaneously pressuring her to abandon her faith. The assault represented an additional layer of domination and intimidation directed at a woman whose religious identity had already become the basis for continued mistreatment. By violating her sexual autonomy while she was facing sustained religious coercion, the perpetrators reinforced an environment in which her dignity, agency, and right to remain Hindu were systematically undermined. The victim's own statements regarding the circumstances she endured are also significant. She consistently described being subjected to pressure intended to make her abandon her faith and accept another religion. Such statements are important because they reveal how the victim herself experienced the conduct directed against her. The issue was not merely conflict within a marriage or disagreement between family members. The victim identified religious conversion as a central feature of the abuse she faced. Her repeated efforts to seek assistance from authorities further demonstrated that the pressure was serious, prolonged, and deeply connected to her continued adherence to Hinduism. The timing and nature of the conversion pressure are equally revealing. The Hindu woman had remained married for many years and had built a family with her husband. However, after he entered into a relationship with another woman and remarried, the pressure upon his Hindu wife intensified. Rather than protecting the interests of his Hindu wife and children, efforts were directed towards compelling her to abandon her religious identity. This demonstrated that her continued existence as a Hindu within the family was viewed as an obstacle rather than something to be respected. The pressure to convert emerged not as an isolated request but as a mechanism through which her position within the household could be altered and controlled. By demanding a change in religion rather than accepting her existing faith, the perpetrators made her Hindu identity the focal point of the conflict. The use of inducements to secure conversion further highlighted the religious motivation behind the conduct. The victim stated that promises of housing and security were offered if she agreed to convert. Such inducements are significant because they seek to exploit vulnerability and desperation in order to achieve a religious outcome. The objective was not simply reconciliation or family support. Assistance was made conditional upon the abandonment of her Hindu faith. This transformed basic needs and security into tools of religious coercion. The victim was placed in a position where acceptance, shelter, and stability were linked to surrendering her religious identity. The coercive nature of this pressure becomes even clearer when viewed alongside her exclusion from the family home. The Hindu woman found herself isolated, deprived of support, and confronted with demands that she convert in order to improve her circumstances. Such conditions presented religious conversion as the only path to acceptance and security. This was not a free or voluntary religious choice but pressure imposed upon a vulnerable woman whose social and economic position had already been weakened. The fact that she ultimately attempted to set herself on fire inside a government office demonstrates the severity of the distress she experienced. The desperation that drove her towards such a permanent act shows the immense psychological burden created by the sustained exclusion, coercion, and pressure directed at her because she remained Hindu. Therefore, the conversion pressure directed at the Hindu woman, the efforts to alter the religious identity of her children, the inducements offered in exchange for conversion, the exclusion she faced because she was Hindu, and the sexual violence inflicted upon her demonstrate that religion was not incidental to this case. The conduct consistently targeted the victim's continued adherence to Hinduism and sought to replace that identity with another. 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 initial contact and marriage between the Hindu woman and the Muslim perpetrator took place many years before the incident became public, but the exact date was not specified in the available sources. The tracker records incident dates based on when the crime occurred, not when it was publicly reported. Since the precise starting date of the coercion and religious targeting could not be independently confirmed, 11th June 2026, the date on which the case entered the public domain, was used as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes only. The Hinduphobia Tracker also acknowledges that multiple Muslim perpetrators were involved in the religious coercion, exclusion, and harassment directed at the Hindu woman and her children. However, as only Guddu Qureshi and the victim's brother-in-law were specifically identified in available reports, the perpetrator count has been recorded as 2, while noting that additional unnamed members of the husband's family were also involved in the pressure to convert, exclusion from the family home, and related acts directed against the Hindu family.
Victim Details
Total Victim
4
Deceased
0
Gender
- Male 2
- Female 2
- Third Gender 0
- Unknown 0
Caste
- SC/ST 0
- OBC 0
- General 0
- Unknown 4
Age Group
- Minor 3
- Adult 1
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 0
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 2 To 5
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
