Hindu woman raped and pressured to convert by Muslim man posing as Hindu; Islamic cleric promises monetary rewards to accused for carrying out conversion

Case ID : 30a916b | Location : North Delhi, Delhi, India | Date of Incident : Tue, 21 June, 2022

Case ID : 30a916b

North Delhi, Delhi, India

21 June, 2022

Hindu woman raped and pressured to convert by Muslim man posing as Hindu; Islamic cleric promises monetary rewards to accused for carrying out conversion

Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes

Man pretends to be Hindu

Name Changed

Forced conversion before marriage

Forced to go to Mosque

Forced to do Nikah

Blackmailed to convert

Assault or threat upon refusal to convert

Attack not resulting in death

Attacked for refusal to convert

Case Summary

A 36-year-old Hindu woman from Burari, Delhi, who worked as a social media influencer, was befriended and sexually assaulted by a Muslim man named Mohammad Shakib Zardari, who posed as a Hindu. He also took her to a mosque, where he pressured her to convert to Islam and undergo a nikah (Islamic marriage). At the mosque, an Islamic cleric supported the conversion efforts and promised the accused and his associates a payment of ₹5 lakh if they succeeded in converting the woman to Islam, with the promise of a larger sum if they also succeeded in converting her family. Upon refusing to convert, the victim was threatened and physically assaulted by the accused and his accomplices. According to available information, the victim came into contact with the accused, Mohammad Shakib Zardari, through Instagram in 2022. He operated the Instagram account under the handle "NCERT King 2020" and introduced himself using the Hindu name "Veer" (while some media sources identified him as "Sunny"). By concealing his real identity and religious background, he gradually established a friendship with the woman through regular online interactions. Over time, he gained her confidence while portraying himself as a fellow content creator and social media influencer. In September 2022, Zardari called the victim to a hotel in Burari on the pretext of shooting social media reels and creating online content. According to the victim, he sexually assaulted her at the hotel and subsequently used videos and other material from the encounter to blackmail her. Through this blackmail, he continued to sexually exploit her over an extended period. She later discovered that the identity under which he had befriended her was false and that he had concealed his real name and Muslim identity from the beginning of their association. Following this discovery, she ended all contact with him. The woman further stated that after the sexual assault, Zardari pressured her to convert to Islam and marry him. She stated that one of his brothers, Ziah Afroz, a lawyer by profession, threatened her with death and threatened to kill members of her family if she refused to convert and marry Zardari. According to the victim, Zardari and his brother-in-law, Usman, who was also a lawyer, subsequently took her to a mosque and attempted to persuade her to abandon Hinduism and convert to Islam. She stated that an Islamic cleric present at the mosque supported the conversion efforts and promised to pay between ₹5 lakh and ₹5.5 lakh to Zardari and Usman if they succeeded in converting her to Islam. The cleric further stated that if they managed to convert her entire family as well, they would receive an even larger sum of money. When the victim refused to comply with the demands to convert, the situation escalated on 5 April 2026. According to her account, Ziah Afroz, accompanied by four other Muslims, including two women, approached her near her residence and subjected her and her family to brutal physical assault and social humiliation. The incident subsequently came to the attention of her husband, following which a formal complaint was lodged with the police. The victim further stated that after she severed ties with Zardari, members of his family contacted her and continued to issue threats against her. Based on the victim's complaint, Delhi Police registered a First Information Report at Burari Police Station on 10 June 2026 and initiated an investigation. During the preliminary inquiry, the police identified Zardari as a resident of Amroha district in Uttar Pradesh. The authorities began efforts to trace him, while offences relating to sexual assault, blackmail, criminal intimidation, concealment of identity and pressure to convert religion were being investigated against him.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The first primary category selected in this case is: Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes. The subcategory selected is: Man pretends to be Hindu. The tertiary category selected is: Name Changed. 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: Forced conversion before marriage. The tertiary categories selected are: Forced to go to mosque and Forced to do Nikah. In such cases, a non-Hindu man is in a relationship with a Hindu woman when the pressure to convert her religion begins to manifest. 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, however, at some point during the relationship, the non-Hindu man starts to force the victim to convert her religion and give up her Hindu religious identity. 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 the situations, the methods used to force the victim to convert her religion often revolve around force-feeding beef, forcing her to wear hijab, forcing her to read the Kalma or even pressurizing the victim to do ‘Nikah’, which is marriage under Islamic law, with a prerequisite being conversion to Islam. Cases where a Hindu woman consensually converts to Islam in a relationship will be left out of the hate crime database, even though it could be argued in several cases that the conversion was a result of religious brainwashing. The other subcategory selected 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. The other subcategory selected 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. The second primary category selected in this case is: Attack not resulting in death. The subcategory selected is: Attacked for refusal to convert. When there is pressure, threat or coercion employed upon the Hindu victim to convert to a different religion, in several cases, the victim refuses to succumb to the pressure/threats. Once the victim refuses, the perpetrator proceeds to attack/assault the victim owing to his/her refusal to convert. In such cases, the pressure/threat/intimidation/coercion/violence itself is driven by animosity towards the victim’s Hindu faith. The violence then is another hate crime driven by the victim’s refusal to abandon his professed faith, Hinduism, and convert to the religion of a non-Hindu perpetrator. Since the victim’s faith is at the heart of the pressure to convert and the ensuing violence towards the victim, such cases are considered religiously motivated hate crimes. This case was a clear example of a religiously driven hate crime, as a Hindu woman was befriended by a Muslim man who concealed his real identity, taken to an apartment under false pretences, sexually assaulted, subjected to blackmail, pressured to convert to Islam, undergo a nikah and later assaulted when she refused to abandon her faith. The sequence of events demonstrated a pattern of deception, coercion and religious targeting that went far beyond an ordinary criminal offence. The victim was not only exploited physically and emotionally but was also pressured to renounce her religious identity, making the offence a direct attack on both her bodily autonomy and her faith. First, the perpetrator's act of deception by posing as a Hindu demonstrated clear bias and malicious intent towards the victim's religion. By hiding his true identity, the accused manipulated the Hindu woman's trust and targeted her under false pretences, indicating a premeditated effort to exploit her based on her religious background. This constituted a direct violation of her right to informed consent regarding whom she chooses to be in connection with, as well as an infringement upon her religious beliefs. Thus, the perpetrator's deliberate decision to hide his religious identity strongly underscored the religious motive behind this crime. In such instances, identity concealment is not just a deceptive tactic for personal reasons but a calculated strategy rooted in religious profiling and targeting. The accused knew that the victim, being Hindu, would likely refuse his advances if she knew his real identity, and he circumvented this by lying, which directly pointed to religiously driven intent. This deception reflects a larger pattern where Hindu women are specifically singled out using false identities by Muslim men. Such targeted victimisation based on religion demonstrates a fundamental disregard for Hinduism and exposes deeper animosity towards Hindu women and their beliefs, making it a religiously driven hate crime. The sexual assault that the victim stated she endured cannot be viewed in isolation from the broader pattern of conduct directed against her. The perpetrator deliberately concealed his identity, posed as a Hindu to gain her trust, and then sexually assaulted her before attempting to exert control over her life and religious choices. The sequence of events indicates that the sexual violence was not merely an act of physical exploitation but formed part of a wider effort to dominate, subjugate and psychologically break a Hindu woman. Here, sexual violence is used as a tool of power, humiliation and control, and in this case, the victim's religious identity was central to the targeting she experienced. By specifically deceiving and exploiting a Hindu woman while concealing his true identity, the perpetrator demonstrated hostility towards her religious identity and sought to exercise dominance over her because of it. The assault therefore extended beyond a conventional criminal offence and assumed a religious dimension, making it a clear example of a religiously motivated hate crime directed at a Hindu woman. The subsequent acts of blackmail and pressure to convert further demonstrated the depth of hostility directed towards the victim's religious identity. Freedom of religion includes the right to practise, profess and retain one's faith without coercion or intimidation. Any attempt to force a person to abandon their religion through threats, blackmail or undue pressure constitutes a serious violation of that individual's religious autonomy and fundamental rights. According to the victim's account, the accused used coercive tactics to compel her to convert to Islam after sexually assaulting her. Such conduct indicated that her Hindu identity was not being respected but was instead being treated as something inferior that needed to be discarded and replaced. When conversion is pursued through blackmail, intimidation and coercion rather than through the free and informed choice of the individual, it ceases to be a matter of personal belief and becomes an act of religious domination. The efforts to force the victim to abandon Hinduism therefore reflected a pattern of hostility towards her faith and transformed the incident into a religiously motivated hate crime aimed at erasing her religious identity. The victim further stated that she was taken to a mosque and subjected to additional pressure to convert to Islam. This act carried particular significance because it demonstrated that the pressure to convert was not confined to private conversations but was pursued through organised and sustained efforts. The attempts to secure her conversion at a religious institution, coupled with the preceding blackmail and coercion, reflected a determined effort to strip her of her Hindu identity and replace it with a new religious identity against her wishes. Such conduct represented a direct assault on her freedom of conscience and religious choice. The cumulative effect of the deception, sexual exploitation, blackmail and conversion pressure revealed a pattern of behaviour directed at undermining and extinguishing the victim's religious identity, thereby reinforcing the religiously motivated nature of the offence. The attempts to compel the victim to undergo a Nikah further underscored the religious dimension of the case. The accused not only pressured her to convert but also sought to marry her following conversion. Under Islamic jurisprudence, a non-Muslim woman is required to convert to Islam before marrying a Muslim man through a Nikah. In this context, the insistence on conversion prior to marriage demonstrated that the objective extended beyond a personal relationship and involved altering the victim's religious identity as a prerequisite for the union. The proposed Nikah was therefore not presented as a free and independent choice of the victim but as the culmination of sustained efforts to secure her conversion. The marriage would have formalised and institutionalised the conversion that the accused and his associates were seeking to achieve, while simultaneously reinforcing their control over the victim's religious identity. Consequently, the pressure to undergo a Nikah after conversion further strengthened the conclusion that the victim was being targeted because of her faith and that the conversion was being pursued to satisfy a religious requirement, making the conduct consistent with a religiously motivated hate crime. The threats directed at the victim by the accused and his associates further highlighted the extent of the hostility involved. According to the victim, she was threatened with violence, while members of her family were also threatened if she refused to convert and marry the accused. Such conduct went far beyond persuasion and entered the realm of intimidation and coercion. When conversion is sought through threats of harm, it ceases to be a matter of individual choice and instead becomes an attempt to impose religious conformity through fear. Significantly, the victim stated that the accused was not acting alone. She described the involvement of his relatives, including his brother and brother-in-law, in the efforts to pressure and threaten her. The participation of multiple individuals suggested a coordinated and deliberate effort rather than an isolated act. This collective pressure reinforced the conclusion that the objective was to compel the victim to abandon her Hindu identity through coercive means, further demonstrating the religiously motivated nature of the conduct. Another crucial aspect of this case is the role played by the Islamic cleric at the mosque who supported the conversion efforts and discussed monetary rewards for successfully converting the Hindu woman and her family. The victim stated that the cleric promised substantial sums of money to the accused if her conversion was secured, with even larger rewards being offered if additional members of her family were also converted. Such statements suggest that the pressure exerted upon the victim extended far beyond a personal dispute and formed part of a broader and organised effort to secure coercive religious conversions. The discussion of financial incentives for converting a Hindu woman and her family indicates a deliberate attempt to target individuals on the basis of their religious identity rather than respecting their freedom of belief and conscience. It also reflects a mindset in which Hindu women are viewed not as individuals entitled to dignity, autonomy and religious freedom, but as targets for conversion whose identities are to be altered and absorbed into another faith. This dehumanising approach reduces Hindu women to objects of religious acquisition rather than recognising them as human beings with the right to make their own choices. Viewed alongside the deception, sexual exploitation, coercion, threats and sustained pressure described by the victim, the cleric's involvement reinforces the perception that the objective was to strip the victim of her Hindu identity and replace it with another religious identity. The coordinated nature of these actions points towards a calculated and premeditated effort directed at a Hindu woman because of her faith, thereby strengthening the conclusion that the incident exhibited the characteristics of a religiously motivated hate crime. The events that followed the victim's refusal to convert further highlighted the religiously motivated nature of the offence. After she resisted the demands to abandon Hinduism and marry the accused, other Muslim individuals associated with him went to her residence and subjected both her and her family to assault, threats and humiliation. The timing and context of this violence are highly significant, as it occurred only after the victim refused to renounce her faith and comply with the demands being imposed upon her. This was not a random altercation or an ordinary personal dispute; rather, it was a retaliatory act directed at the victim because she chose to remain Hindu and refused to submit to conversion. Violence and intimidation used to punish an individual for refusing to change their religion constitute a direct attack on both personal liberty and religious freedom. The targeting of not only the victim but also her family demonstrates an attempt to create fear, exert pressure and force compliance through collective intimidation. Such actions send a message that refusal to convert would invite consequences not only for the individual concerned but also for those close to them. The assault therefore functioned as a punitive measure aimed at breaking the victim's resolve, undermining her religious autonomy and coercing her into abandoning her faith. This deliberate targeting of a Hindu woman and her family for resisting conversion reinforces the conclusion that the violence was driven by hostility towards her religious identity and forms a significant indicator of a religiously motivated hate crime. Overall, since this case met multiple parameters of a religiously motivated crime, it is being added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when the victim's ordeal begins rather than when the incident is reported by the media or brought to public attention. In the present case, media reports do not specify the exact date on which the victim's ordeal began. The reports only state that the victim first came into contact with the perpetrator in 2022, without providing a specific date or month. Since the precise commencement date of the victim's ordeal cannot be determined from the available information, and the earliest media reports concerning the case were published on 22 June 2026. Therefore, an indicative incident date of 22 June 2022 has been selected. This date has been recorded for documentation and classification purposes only and should not be construed as the exact date on which the victim's ordeal began. Based on the details available in the case, the total perpetrator count has been recorded as eight individuals. These include Mohammad Shakib Zardari (male), the principal accused; his brother Ziah Afroz (male); his brother-in-law Usman (male); the Islamic cleric at the mosque (male); and four additional individuals who participated in the assault and intimidation of the victim and her family after she refused conversion. Of these four individuals, two were men, and two were women. Accordingly, the total count consists of six male perpetrators and two female perpetrators, bringing the overall perpetrator count in this case to eight individuals. This count has been recorded on the basis of the individuals specifically identified or described in the available case details. In the present case, the victim stated that she and her family were subjected to assault and humiliation after she refused to convert. However, the available reports do not specify the exact number of family members who were affected or directly targeted during the incident. Since only the Hindu woman has been specifically identified and documented as a victim in the available information, a conservative victim count of one has been recorded for this case. This figure has been selected solely for documentation, classification and database-recording purposes and should not be interpreted as excluding the possibility that additional family members may also have been victims of the incident.