Minor Hindu girl groomed by Muslim man posing as a Hindu; later pressured for religious conversion and nikah
Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India 
3 July, 2011
Case Summary
In Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, a Hindu woman was deceived into a relationship and marriage by a Muslim man named Ayub Khan, who pretended to be Hindu. He also pressured her to convert to Islam and undergo nikah with him. According to reports, the Hindu woman, originally a resident of Jalaun, Uttar Pradesh, stated that she came into contact with the accused at a wedding ceremony, about 15 years ago, in 2011, when she was just a minor. During this time, the accused, Ayub Khan, had concealed his religious identity by introducing himself as "Bunty Kushwaha" and developed a friendship with her and later married her in a Hindu temple while presenting himself as a Hindu. The woman stated that she discovered his real identity about three years after their marriage, following the birth of their daughter, when she visited his family home and found that his real name was Ayub Khan and that he was already married with four children. When she objected, his family persuaded her to continue living with them. She further stated that he subsequently subjected her to continuous physical abuse, beat her regularly, and pressured her to convert to Islam. He repeatedly insisted that she must undergo nikah with him and convert to Islam. She also said that he attempted to strangle her with her scarf two days before the complaint, but she survived after her nephew intervened. The woman further stated that Ayub Khan had been planning to sell both her and their daughter to another man and assaulted her when she resisted. Seeking assistance, she approached Bajrang Dal activists, who accompanied her along with members of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) to the Gwalior police station, where they staged a peaceful protest by reciting the Hanuman Chalisa outside the premises and demanded immediate action. Police recorded the woman's complaint and stated that an investigation had been initiated, with further legal action to be taken based on the evidence gathered.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of - Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes. Within it, the sub-category selected is - Man pretends to be Hindu, with the tertiary category being - Name changed and Marries as per Hindu rituals. 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 sub-category selected here is - Forced conversion after marriage, with the tertiary category being - Forced to do nikah. 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 sub-category selected here is - Brainwashed and/or groomed, with the tertiary category being - Conversion of minor. 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 second primary category selected here is - Predatory Proselytisation. Within it, the sub-category selected here is - Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination, with the tertiary category being - Conversion of 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 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 has been added to the tracker because a Hindu woman was lured into a relationship by a Muslim man, who pretended to be Hindu. Firstly, the accused deliberately concealed his religious identity to initiate and sustain a relationship with a Hindu woman. This itself is a clear manifestation of bias and malicious intent towards the victim's religion. By concealing his true identity, he exploited her trust, targeting her under false pretences. This indicates a premeditated intent to manipulate her based on her religious background. In cases like these, the tactic of adopting a false Hindu identity to manipulate and "ensnare" a Hindu individual is not just an act of personal betrayal but can also be interpreted as an expression of disdain or disregard for Hinduism and its customs that reflects a deeper animosity towards Hindus and their beliefs. Secondly, it is further important to note here that when the accused trapped the victim, she was just a minor, which means the element of consent and genuine change of conscience was missing ab initio. 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 consenting to a relationship or converting to another religion, and the Muslim perpetrator purposely targeted and exploited this vulnerability of the victim. Since this case exemplifies the use of coercion and manipulation to achieve a deceptive relationship and later religious conversion, it is a blatant act of religious hate. The targeting of the victim while she was still a minor is significant because it reveals an effort to shape her choices before she had attained full maturity and independence. In this context, the early grooming, the concealment of religious identity, and the later pressure to abandon her Hindu faith form part of a single continuum of coercion. The concern is not merely that a relationship began at a young age, but that trust was cultivated in order to facilitate a marriage that the victim would not have entered into with full knowledge of the accused's identity, and was then followed by efforts to compel religious conversion. Taken together, these elements demonstrates that the conduct was directed at undermining the religious autonomy of a Hindu woman and breaking her resistance to conversion, rather than a purely personal or incidental dispute. Thirdly, the victim further stated that after discovering the accused's real identity, she was subjected to continuous physical abuse and persistent pressure to convert to Islam. The accused repeatedly insisted that she must embrace Islam and undergo nikah with him. In Islam, marriage to a non-Muslim partner is prohibited, which is why she was pressured for religious conversion. This shows that the Muslim perpetrator specifically targeted and groomed the Hindu victim when she was just a minor, for religious conversion. Pressuring a Hindu individual to discard her religious faith and embrace another was a direct attack on her religious identity and dignity. It was not a matter of personal choice; it was coercion rooted in hostility towards the victim's Hindu identity. Such an attempt reflects religious animosity because the act was not simply about personal differences but about erasing the victim’s Hindu faith, making it a religiously motivated crime. Fourth, the accused also attempted to kill her by strangling her and had been planning to sell both her and her daughter. These threats, intimidation and violence were not isolated acts of domestic abuse but formed part of a broader pattern of coercion aimed at breaking the will of the Hindu woman and compelling her to renounce her religion. The victim's Hindu identity was not incidental to the offences but was central to the pattern of coercion and violence. This was not random violence; it was systematic, targeted, and rooted in religious animosity Such actions stem 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 acts were not merely personal crimes; they were rooted in a desire to dominate and erase the religious identity of the victim. Since such predatory actions stem from doctrinal animosity towards the Hindu faith and its adherents, this case is being documented as a religiously motivated hate crime. The fact that the woman approached the authorities many years after the marriage does not, by itself, diminish the seriousness of the complaint. In many parts of India, particularly in rural and socially conservative communities, women often endure prolonged abuse due to social stigma, economic dependence, fear of retaliation, and the pressure to preserve family honour. The expectation of safeguarding the family's reputation frequently outweighs a woman's own safety and well-being, leading many victims to remain silent until the abuse escalates to a point where continuing to endure it becomes impossible. In the present case, the complaint was lodged only after the violence, threats, and sustained pressure to renounce her Hindu faith intensified. The delayed reporting is therefore consistent with the broader social realities that can discourage victims from coming forward at an earlier stage, rather than being indicative of the absence of abuse. Disclaimer: It is important to clarify that none of the media sources covering this case have specified the exact date when the victim's ordeal began, though it is mentioned that she came into contact with the accused in 2011. Thus, to document this case, we have used an indicative date, 4 July 2011, as a placeholder to represent the beginning of her suffering. While media coverage of the incident emerged on 4 July 2026, the Hinduphobia Tracker records the incident based on when the victim’s ordeal began, not when it was reported.
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
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
