Minor Hindu girl with impaired mental condition gang-raped, forced to eat meat and pressured for religious conversion
Rampur, Uttar Pradesh, India 
24 October, 2026
Case Summary
In Swar, Rampur, Uttar Pradesh, a minor Hindu girl, who was intellectually disabled, was forced to eat meat, gang-raped, blackmailed, assaulted and pressured for religious conversion. The incident came to light after the victim’s sister approached the Superintendent of Police, seeking action against the accused and his associates. The victim had suffered a serious head injury after falling from a roof while studying in Class 10. The injury affected her mental condition, leaving her unable to make sound judgements about her own welfare. Taking advantage of her vulnerability, a man from Swar lured her away from home. During the incident, approximately three tolas of gold jewellery and ₹20,000 were taken from the girl's home. The girl was subsequently taken to Noida, where the youth and three other associates gang-raped her. She was also subjected to physical assault, and an obscene video of her was filmed. The accused and his family members then threatened the girl and threatened to kill her family. Furthermore, she was also forced to consume meat and pressured for religious conversion. They also intimidated her into giving a statement in court in the accused’s favour, leaving her frightened. The victim’s sister submitted a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police, seeking action against the accused and his associates. Following the Superintendent of Police’s directions, a First Information Report (FIR) was registered on 25 October 2026. According to a media report, the police had attempted to suppress the matter.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The first primary category selected in this case is: Predatory Proselytisation. The subcategory selected is: Harassment, threats, 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 on discriminatory grounds which has the effect of nullifying a person’s rights or infringing upon his freedom to exercise his right 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 cases documented, 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 other subcategory selected is: Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination. The tertiary categories are: Family claims grooming, Rape and sexual assault/harassment and 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 is a clear example of a religiously driven hate crime, as a minor Hindu girl with an impaired mental condition was forced to eat meat and pressured to abandon her Hindu faith. These acts targeted her religious identity through dietary coercion and pressure to convert, alongside threats, assault and sexual violence. Firstly, pressuring a Hindu minor girl to abandon her Hindu faith constituted a direct assault on her religious identity, spiritual autonomy and right to preserve her inherited beliefs. Hinduism is not merely a religious label; it encompasses spiritual convictions, cultural traditions, family practices and a civilisational heritage that held profound significance for Hindus. Pressuring a Hindu minor to renounce this identity sought to sever the connection between the individual and her faith, undermining her freedom to retain the beliefs with which she identified. It constituted a direct exploitation of her vulnerability and undermined her ability to exercise independent choice. Religious conversion achieved through coercion is not a genuine expression of religious freedom; it is an infringement of that freedom. Pressuring a Hindu girl to abandon her faith therefore represented an attack on her right to remain Hindu without intimidation, manipulation or interference. Here, the objective was to replace her existing religious identity against her wishes, because of which the conduct struck at the heart of her religious liberty and personal dignity. Secondly, forcing a Hindu girl to eat meat against her wishes constituted an assault on her bodily autonomy and violated dietary convictions rooted in her Hindu faith. Within Hinduism, vegetarianism has long been regarded by many Hindus as an expression of ahimsa (non-violence), compassion towards living beings, spiritual discipline and respect for life. Many Hindu communities and devotees abstain from meat, while some observe strict dietary restrictions as an integral part of their religious practice and personal commitment to their faith. Forcing a Hindu to violate a sincerely held religious dietary conviction was an act of coercion, not a matter of ordinary food consumption. It deprived the individual of control over what she consumed and disregarded the beliefs she sought to uphold. When considered alongside pressure to abandon Hinduism, forced meat consumption formed part of a broader pattern of conduct that undermined the girl's religious autonomy and subjected her personal convictions to the will of others. The seriousness of the act lay in the imposition of a dietary choice against her wishes and the disregard for her right to practise Hinduism according to her own convictions. It is to be noted that the accused exploited the vulnerability of a minor Hindu girl whose mental condition had been affected by a serious head injury, taking advantage of her impaired ability to make sound judgements to subject her to religious coercion. Exploiting a cognitively vulnerable minor to exert pressure on her religious beliefs constituted a grave violation of her autonomy, dignity and freedom of conscience. Such conduct was particularly reprehensible because it involved a minor girl whose circumstances demanded protection and care, not manipulation and coercion. By targeting her religious choices while taking advantage of her vulnerability, the accused undermined her ability to exercise her religious freedom independently and compounded the harm inflicted upon her. It is further important to note here that the victim was 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 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 religious conversion, it is a blatant act of religious hate, which is why it has been documented here in the hate tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incidents based on when an event occurred or when the victim's ordeal began. It is important to clarify that none of the media sources covering this case has specified the exact date when the incident occurred. Therefore, for documentation purposes, we have recorded the date based on when the First Information Report (FIR) was registered, 25 October 2026.
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
Unknown
Perpetrators Range
From 2 To 5
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
