Hindu woman manipulated into conversion to Islam by Muslim woman, forced to recite Kalma and later threatened with death and acid attack

Case ID : 30aa496 | Location : Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Mon, 10 September, 2018

Case ID : 30aa496

Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India

10 September, 2018

Hindu woman manipulated into conversion to Islam by Muslim woman, forced to recite Kalma and later threatened with death and acid attack

Predatory Proselytisation

Harassment, threats, coercion for conversion

Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination

Case Summary

In Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, a Hindu woman was targeted by a Muslim woman for religious conversion to Islam. The Hindu woman was identified as Mahima Gupta, while the Muslim woman was identified as Farha Begum alias Lucky, a resident of the Ghoshia Masjid area in Parvez Nagar. Farha frequently visited Mahima’s family home for studies. In 2018, after Mahima had a dispute with her father, Farha intervened, influenced her against her family, arranged certain documents, and took her to stay at her own residence. Mahima thereafter remained at Farha’s house for several years. During this period, Farha took Mahima to a mosque, made her recite the Kalma and converted her to Islam. Mahima continued living with Farha after the conversion. Over time, the treatment towards her deteriorated, and she was subjected to sustained harassment and physical abuse. The abuse intensified on Raksha Bandhan, when Mahima was locked inside a room and beaten. Loud music was played so that her screams could not be heard outside. The following day, she found an opportunity to escape from the house and returned to her father, where she disclosed the ordeal she had undergone. Even after Mahima returned to her family, Farha continued to intimidate, abuse and threaten her. Mahima received calls from different mobile numbers, and Farha repeatedly monitored the area around her residence. She was threatened with death and an acid attack intended to disfigure her face if she refused to return. The threats were also extended to Mahima’s family. Farha threatened to kill Mahima’s father and sister and warned that members of the family would be implicated in false rape cases and other fabricated criminal cases. Mahima also stated that whenever the police were informed about Farha’s presence, she would leave before the authorities arrived. Fearing for her safety and that of her family, Mahima approached the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bareilly, seeking protection and legal action. On the SSP’s directions, Kila Police Station registered an FIR against Farha Begum alias Lucky. Circle Officer Nitin Kumar confirmed that the case had been registered and that the police were investigating the circumstances surrounding Mahima’s conversion, her prolonged stay at Farha’s residence, the physical abuse and the subsequent threats directed at her and her family.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The primary category selected for this case is: Predatory proselytisation. The subcategory selected for this case is: Harassment, threat, 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 in discriminatory grounds that have the effect of nullifying a person’s rights or infringing upon his freedom to exercise his rights 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 documented cases, 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. The subcategory selected for this case is: Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing and subtle indoctrination. 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 in the attempts at 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. This case qualified as a religiously motivated hate crime because a Hindu woman’s emotional vulnerability and trust were systematically exploited to detach her from her family, weaken her existing religious identity, and bring her into Islam. The conversion was not presented as the outcome of an independent spiritual choice. Instead, the sequence reflected grooming, manipulation and subsequent coercion, in which the victim’s Hindu identity became something the perpetrator sought to replace. These actions of the accused stemmed 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. This mindset does not merely tolerate the existence of another faith but seeks its erasure or assimilation. As a result, Hindus are often targeted not because of who they are as individuals, but because of their religious identity. The violence, deception, or humiliation inflicted in such cases is therefore not random, but part of a broader ideological hostility toward Hinduism and its symbols, practices, and adherents. Here, too, the predatory actions stemmed from doctrinal animosity towards the Hindu faith, which is why this case is being documented as a religiously motivated hate crime. A particularly significant element was the abuse of trust during a period of personal vulnerability. The Muslim woman was already known to the victim and her family and gained greater influence after the Hindu woman had a dispute with her father. Rather than merely providing temporary support, she gradually isolated the woman from her familial environment and brought her under her own control. This is characteristic of predatory grooming, where an existing relationship of familiarity and confidence is used to create dependence before religious influence is introduced. Such manipulation is especially serious because the victim is made more receptive to the perpetrator’s influence precisely when her ordinary support structure is weakened. The subsequent act of taking the Hindu woman to a mosque and making her recite the Kalma gave the conduct an unmistakable religious direction. The Kalma is a profession of Islamic faith and therefore carries direct significance in the context of conversion to Islam. Compelling a Hindu woman to recite it was not simply the introduction of another religion’s teachings; it represented an attempt to formally displace her professed Hindu identity and replace it with adherence to Islam. The religious transformation was therefore the objective of the manipulation rather than an incidental consequence. The later confinement, physical abuse and threats demonstrated how the initial grooming developed into overt coercion. Once the victim attempted to reclaim her autonomy and return to her family, intimidation was used to pressure her into submission. Threats of death, acid attack and fabricated criminal cases created a sustained atmosphere of fear designed to prevent her from exercising free choice and distancing herself from the perpetrator. When such harassment follows an involuntary religious conversion, it reflects hostility towards the victim’s attempt to regain control over her life and preserve or return to her original religious identity. The case therefore reflected both subtle indoctrination and direct coercion operating as parts of the same process. Trust was first cultivated and exploited; the victim was separated from her family environment; her religious identity was altered through a conversion ritual; and violence and intimidation were subsequently used when she resisted the perpetrator’s control. This progression showed a deep disregard for the woman’s religious autonomy and reflected animosity towards her continued Hindu identity. Taken together, the exploitation of vulnerability, abuse of trust, forced religious initiation, isolation, physical harassment and continuing threats demonstrated a sustained effort to disenfranchise a Hindu woman from her faith and keep her within another religious fold against her will. The conduct therefore went beyond an interpersonal dispute and reflected religious hostility directed at the victim specifically through the targeting and attempted erasure of her Hindu identity, warranting its inclusion in the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records an incident based on the date on which the incident began, rather than the date on which it was subsequently reported or discussed. In this case, the exact date on which Mahima Gupta first came under Farha Begum alias Lucky’s influence and the conversion-related ordeal began was not specified; the material only stated that these events began in 2018. Therefore, 11th September 2018 has been recorded as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes only.