Hindu woman police constable sexually exploited on promise of marriage and pressured to convert to Islam; repeatedly told Hinduism is ‘inferior’ and Islam ‘pure’

Case ID : 30aa31e | Location : Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India | Date of Incident : Thu, 3 September, 2026

Case ID : 30aa31e

Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

3 September, 2026

Hindu woman police constable sexually exploited on promise of marriage and pressured to convert to Islam; repeatedly told Hinduism is ‘inferior’ and Islam ‘pure’

Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes

Forced conversion before marriage

Hate speech against Hindus

Anti-Hindu slurs, mocking faith

Case Summary

In Ahmedabad, Gujarat, a Hindu woman serving as a police constable was sexually exploited repeatedly by a Muslim man, Majid Khan Pathan, on the promise of marriage and was later pressured to convert to Islam. The accused also repeatedly denigrated her faith, telling her that “Hinduism was inferior and Islam was pure.” According to reports, Majid entered into a relationship with the Hindu woman by promising to marry her and subsequently sexually exploited her on multiple occasions. He was already married and had a child, but concealed this from her. After establishing the relationship, Majid began pressuring the woman to abandon Hinduism and embrace Islam. He also wanted her to leave her government job and adopt an Islamic way of life. During these interactions, he repeatedly demeaned her faith, telling her that Hinduism was inferior while Islam was pure. On one occasion, while harassing her over her religion, he told her, “You Hindus are just like this.” The accused also displayed controlling and aggressive behaviour towards the victim. When she refused to accompany him, he threw and smashed her mobile phone at a railway station. His behaviour reportedly became more hostile after she realised his intentions and began distancing herself from him. In addition to the sexual exploitation and religious coercion, Majid allegedly defrauded the woman of ₹17 lakh by inducing her to invest money on the promise of high returns. She subsequently approached the Gomtipur Police Station and lodged a complaint detailing the sexual assault, deception, religious harassment, pressure to convert, and financial fraud. Assistant Commissioner of Police Deep Patel confirmed the complaint and the details concerning the accused.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The primary category selected for this case is: Crime against women in relationships and other sexual crimes. The subcategory selected for this case is: Forced conversion before marriage. 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, at some point during the relationship, the non-Hindu man starts to force the victim to convert to his 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 to his religion and give up her religious identity. In both 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 pressuring 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 for this case is: Hate speech against Hindus. The subcategory selected is: Anti-Hindu slurs, mocking faith. Anti-Hindu slurs and the deliberate mocking of the Hindu faith owing to religious animosity involve the usage of derogatory terms, stereotypes, or offensive references to religious practices, symbols, or figures. One of the common anti-Hindu slurs used against Hindus is “cow-worshipper” and “cow piss drinker”. The intention of using this term is to demean and mock Hindus as a group and their religious beliefs since Hindus consider the cow holy. Additionally, some symbols and the slurs attached to them have a historical context that exacerbates the insult, hate, stereotyping, dehumanisation and oppression against Hindus. Cow worship has been used for centuries to denigrate Hindus, insult their faith and oppress Hindus specifically as a religious group. There has been overwhelming documentation about how cow slaughter has been used to persecute Hindus with cow meat being thrown in temples and places of worship. There has also been overwhelming documentation where cow meat (beef) has been force-fed to Hindus to either forcefully convert them to Islam or denigrate their faith. Apart from cow worship, the Swastika – which holds deep religious significance for the Hindus – has also been misinterpreted and distorted to use as a slur against Hindus. Similarly, the worship of the Shivling has been used by supremacist ideologies and religions to denigrate Hindus owing to religious animosity. Such slurs and denigration stem out of inherent animosity and hate towards Hindus and their faith, therefore, it is categorised as hate speech targeted at Hindus specifically owing to their religious identity. This case qualified as a religiously motivated hate crime because the relationship was used as a means to subject a Hindu woman to sustained pressure to abandon her faith and convert to Islam. The religious element was not incidental to the relationship. Once the accused had established emotional access and trust, he repeatedly sought to make the victim give up her Hindu identity, leave her government job and adopt Islam. The attempt to alter her religious identity therefore formed a central part of the coercion exercised over her. The repeated sexual exploitation materially aggravated the religious coercion. Sexual access was obtained within a relationship already shaped by deception and promises of marriage, while the victim was simultaneously subjected to pressure to convert. This meant that the sexual abuse and the religious pressure were not operating in completely separate spheres; both arose within the same relationship of control and manipulation. Her refusal to comply with the accused’s demands was followed by increasingly aggressive behaviour, demonstrating the coercive nature of the relationship. The case also involved a clear element of religious denigration as a means of proselytisation. The accused repeatedly portrayed Hinduism as inferior while describing Islam as pure, thereby attempting to create disaffection towards the victim’s own faith while simultaneously presenting his religion as superior. Such conduct is significant because conversion pressure was reinforced not merely through a demand to adopt another religion, but through the deliberate belittling of the victim’s existing religious beliefs. This transformed the relationship into a space where her Hindu identity itself became the subject of sustained disparagement. Such acts are carried out by Muslim perpetrators due to indoctrination by Islamic theology, which advocates that all non-Muslims (referred to as kafirs) are inferior and subject to subjugation unless they convert to Islam or live under Islamic rule (dhimmitude). These ideas are not mere abstractions; they manifest in actions where non-Muslims, especially Hindus in India, are seen as targets for religious domination, coercion, or humiliation. This theological framework fosters an "us versus them" mindset, in which any assertion of Hindu identity or religious freedom is seen not only as undesirable but as a threat to Islamic supremacy. As a result, perpetrators who are shaped by such teachings feel justified, even morally obligated, to harass, suppress, or violently attack Hindus, particularly when Hindus assert their religious rights or resist conversion. As a result, Muslim perpetrators invoke such doctrines to justify coercive attempts to convert non-Muslims, particularly Hindus, portraying conversion as a means of abandoning Kufr (a state of disbelief in Islam or disbelief in Islam) and attaining salvation. Such acts, therefore, are not isolated but driven by a broader ideological hostility towards Hindus as non-believers and reflect an attempt to impose religious dominance. Since this case was also not a random isolated incident of grooming of a minor but a premeditated attack motivated by bias and hatred against the Hindu community, which is a defining feature of hate crimes, this has been added to the tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records the incident date as the date the victim’s ordeal actually began, rather than the date the case was subsequently brought to public attention. In this case, the exact date or period when the exploitation, sexual abuse and pressure for religious conversion began was not specified. Therefore, 4th September 2026, the date on which Dainik Jagran reported the case, has been recorded as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes only.