Case Summary

In Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, an 18-year-old Hindu girl was lured into a relationship, raped and pressured to convert to Islam a Muslim man named Noor Mohammad alias Tumman. She was assaulted, abused with casteist slurs and pressured to consume cow meat by the accused and her family. According to reports, the victim was a resident of the Rajman Bazaar in the Cantonment area where she was lured into a relationship by the accused, who resided in the same locality. He subsequently took her away and married her on 27 July 2026. After the marriage, they initially lived in a rented accommodation before he brought her to his family home in Rajman Bazaar. On 12 October 2026, at around 9:30 pm, Noor Mohammad attempted to rape her. When she resisted, he assaulted her and subjected her to casteist slurs. His family members supported him and also physically assaulted her. Noor Mohammad and his family repeatedly pressured her to adopt Islam and eat cow meat against her wishes. The victim did not want to convert to Islam, and the harassment and pressure exerted by Noor Mohammad also disrupted her education Distressed by the treatment she experienced, she escaped from the household and sought police intervention. She stated that the in-charge of the Rajman Bazaar police outpost had failed to assist her when she initially approached him and had repeatedly delayed action on her complaint. On 15 October 2026, she submitted a written complaint to the Station House Officer of the Cantt police station, seeking legal action against Noor Mohammad and his family for luring her away, sexually exploiting her, attempting to rape her, assaulting her, using casteist slurs, and pressuring her to convert to Islam and eat cow meat. She attached copies of her caste certificate, Aadhaar card, birth certificate, marriage certificate and High School marksheet to her complaint. Following her complaint, the Cantt police registered a named case against the accused and initiated an investigation. An inquiry was also initiated into her complaint against the Rajman Bazaar police outpost in-charge for failing to provide assistance.

Case Images

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 here is - Forced conversion after marriage. 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 second primary category selected here is - Hate speech against Hindus. Within it, the sub-category selected here 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 constituted a religiously motivated hate crime because the victim was subjected to pressure to abandon her religious identity and adopt Islam against her wishes. The demand that she convert was accompanied by pressure to consume cow, which further demonstrated an attempt to impose religious practices that she did not wish to follow. These demands went beyond a personal disagreement about religious beliefs, as they concerned her freedom to retain her faith and make independent decisions about her religious practices. The pressure exerted by Noor Mohammad and his family sought to make the victim conform to religious expectations that she had explicitly rejected. The circumstances were particularly significant because the pressure to convert continued within the context of the marriage, where the victim was expected to comply with demands concerning her religion and food choices. Marriage did not diminish her right to retain her Hindu identity or refuse to participate in practices contrary to her beliefs. The insistence that she adopt Islam despite her unwillingness demonstrated that her religious autonomy was not being respected. 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. The involvement of the accused's family further aggravated the victim's ordeal, as they supported Noor Mohammad and participated in physically assaulting her. The victim was subjected to sexual coercion by the accused, who attempted to force himself on her, and was beaten when she resisted. Often in such cases, sexual and physical violence serves a dual purpose: physical subjugation and religious humiliation. The intention was to break the victim down, emotionally, physically, and spiritually, so that she could be converted. This was not random violence; it was systematic, targeted, and rooted in religious animosity. Furthermore, the pressure to eat cow meat also carried profound religious significance and was used as an instrument of coercion in this case. In Hinduism, the cow is regarded as sacred and is deeply embedded in religious, cultural, and ritual life. It is referred to in Vedic tradition as Aghanya, meaning “not to be killed,” reflecting its protected and revered status. The cow is associated with purity, sustenance, and ritual sanctity, with its milk used in offerings, its dung in purification rituals, and its presence integral to many yajna practices. Forcing a Hindu girl to consume cow meat, therefore, represents a direct violation of core religious beliefs and dietary laws. It is not merely a physical act but a deliberate transgression of religious boundaries intended to induce psychological distress and weaken resistance to further coercion. Historically, the forced consumption of cow meat has been documented as a tool used by Muslim extremists and Islamic invaders as a method of humiliation and symbolic severance from Hindu identity. In these contexts, the tactic was employed to deliberately violate core religious norms in order to break spiritual resistance and enforce submission through social ostracisation. This same historical pattern is reflected in modern cases where the deliberate imposition of a strictly prohibited act is used to degrade a victim’s religious identity and erode their psychological and spiritual boundaries. Such actions reinforce the act as targeted religious humiliation rather than incidental abuse, fundamentally rooted in hostility toward Hindu beliefs and identity The victim's Dalit identity added a further dimension to the incident. She was subjected to casteist slurs during the assault. It can be argued that a caste-specific slur is aimed at her micro identity of belonging to the Dalit section of the Hindu community and not her Hindu identity itself. However, as far as Abrahamic religions are concerned, the micro identities of caste, region, and language are secondary. It is the religious identity that drives the animosity of the perpetrator against the Hindu victim. In this case, while the accused hurled caste abuses at the victim, the animosity was driven by his animosity towards Hinduism and Hindus. The significance of this case lay in the attempt to override her religious choices through coercion, alongside caste-based verbal abuse and physical violence. 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. Disclaimer: The perpetrator count has been recorded as 1, as only Noor Mohammad alias Dumman was explicitly identified by name. Although the victim's complaint also implicated his family members in the abuse, their individual identities and exact number were not specified. 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. The earliest date mentioned is 27 July 2026, when she got married to the accused. Since Hinduphobia Tracker records the incident based on when the victim’s ordeal began and not when it was reported, we have considered the date of the incident as 27 July 2026, though the media reported the incident on a later date.