Minor Hindu girl lured, kidnapped and forcibly converted to Islam by Muslim man in Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh, India 
15 June, 2026
Case Summary
In Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh, a 15-year-old Hindu girl was lured away from her home, forcibly converted to Islam, and psychologically conditioned to sever contact with her family. The accused Sohail Ansari kidnapped and manipulated the minor into abandoning her faith and refusing to return home. In 2024, a 15-year-old girl from a village under Sahjanwa Thana, Gorakhpur, disappeared from her home. Her mother filed a kidnapping FIR against an unknown accused at the local police station. During the police investigation, the perpetrator was identified as Sohail Ansari, originally from Karma Amjhor in Rohtas district of Bihar. According to the FIR, the accused had lured the girl away through deception and thereafter converted her religion. The mother further stated that following the conversion, he subjected the girl to sustained psychological manipulation and brainwashed her to such a degree that she refused all contact with her family and declined to return home. Police later secured the girl’s rescue and produced the accused before a court, which remanded him to judicial custody. Following his incarceration, police recorded the minor’s statement before the court. In that statement, the girl refused to reside with her family. Given her status as a minor, the court directed that she be placed in a Rajkiya Balika Griha, a government-run girls’ shelter home, where she was also provided counselling. The accused was arrested and sentenced to jail. After his release from jail, Ansari began issuing death threats to the girl’s parents. The family stated that the entire household had been living in fear. Driven by the threats and the continuing failure to secure their daughter’s return, the victim’s family approached the Chief Minister’s Janta Darshan, a public grievance forum, to seek intervention. On the basis of that complaint, a fresh FIR was registered against Sohail Ansari at Sahjanwa thana. Circle Officer Geeda, Yogendra Singh, confirmed the registration of the FIR and stated that a detailed investigation was underway, with further action to follow based on evidence gathered.
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, with the tertiary category being - Family claims grooming and Conversion of a minor. 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 the 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 proselytisation, such cases are considered religiously motivated hate crimes. The primary category for this case is "Attack not resulting in death". The sub-category for this case is "Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save a victim". In several cases, Hindus are attacked for opposing religiously motivated crimes being committed against a fellow Hindu or simply for voicing an opinion opposing radical elements, who either have in the past or continue to persecute Hindus. In such cases, the initial attack against the victim, against which the Hindu was trying to defend the victim, would also need to be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime. Since the initial crime itself was religiously motivated and the subsequent crime of attempting to save the victim or speaking against the radical elements ends up inviting a violent attack, it would also be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime under this category. This case was added to the tracker because it involved the deliberate targeting of a Hindu minor through a process designed to sever her attachment to her family, faith, and existing social environment while facilitating her acceptance of a different religious identity. The conduct went beyond a simple change of belief and reflected a sustained effort to reshape the victim's loyalties, relationships, and worldview in thereby weakening her connection to her Hindu roots. A significant aspect of the case was the use of psychological conditioning and emotional manipulation to influence the minor's decisions and perceptions. Such methods relied not on informed religious choice but on the gradual cultivation of dependence, trust, and emotional control. The objective was to create sufficient distance between the victim and the influences most likely to reinforce her existing religious identity, thereby making her more receptive to religious conversion and less willing to re-establish ties with her family and community. The involvement of a minor carried particular significance. Children and adolescents were especially vulnerable to external influence because of their age and stage of mental and emotional development. Their young minds made them more susceptible to external influence, persuasion, and ideological conditioning than adults. For this reason, decisions relating to a minor's religious identity could not be viewed in the same manner as those made by fully informed adults. As minors generally lack the maturity and understanding required to comprehend the long-term implications of such a choice. This made attempts to alter a minor's religious identity particularly concerning and inherently exploitative. The conduct also reflected a broader pattern in which personal trust and emotional influence were used as instruments to facilitate religious change. By isolating the victim from familial and social bonds associated with her Hindu upbringing, the process effectively undermined the support structures that would otherwise have enabled her to exercise independent judgment. Further, the intimidation directed at the victim's family was inseparably linked to their efforts to protect a Hindu minor and challenge circumstances that had resulted in her religious conversion and separation from her family. The threats did not arise from an unrelated personal dispute; rather, they emerged from the family's continued attempts to secure justice and restore their daughter's connection with her family and Hindu faith. Taken together, the conversion, the family's efforts to oppose it, and the subsequent threats formed part of a connected sequence of events. The targeting of the parents arose precisely because they sought to protect a Hindu victim and challenge actions directed at her religious identity. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when the victim's ordeal began, rather than when it was reported in the media. In this case, the victim's ordeal began in 2024 when she first went missing. The media reports did not state the exact date when the victim's ordeal began. Therefore, the date of the case has been recorded as 15 June 2024, derived by aligning the known year with the article publication date of 15th June 2026. This date has been recorded for documentation purposes only.
Victim Details
Total Victim
1
Deceased
0
Gender
- Male 0
- Female 1
- Third Gender 0
- Unknown 0
Caste
- SC/ST 0
- OBC 0
- General 0
- Unknown 1
Age Group
- Minor 1
- Adult 0
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 0
Case Status
Arrested
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
