Hindu woman befriended, abducted at gunpoint, targeted for forced religious conversion and marriage by Muslim men in Rajasthan
Jaipur, Rajasthan, India 
26 November, 2023
Case Summary
In the Muhana police station area of Jaipur, Rajasthan, a 24-year-old Hindu woman was targeted for religious conversion by Muslim men. The accused befriended her and began manipulating her with inducements, criticising Hinduism and promoting the supposed supremacy of Islam with the intention of converting her. The victim was also pressured into marriage (Nikah). Subsequently, the victim was abducted at gunpoint from her home by the Muslim perpetrators. According to media reports, this incident came to light when the victim’s father, a resident of Sanganer, filed a report at the police station demanding strict action against the accused. In the report, he stated that his daughter helped at his shop alongside her studies. About two years prior, a Muslim man named Akbar opened a shop called "Avarana Jewellers" opposite his vegetable shop and also ran "Bharat Fruit Company" in the Muhana fruit and vegetable market. The victim’s father explained that Akbar, his brother Mehboob Ali, and their friend Aaqib Javed frequently visited his shop under the pretext of buying vegetables and gradually developed a friendship with his daughter. The father stated that the accused lured and misled his daughter, attempting to convert her by denigrating Hinduism and asserting that Islam is superior. On 27th November 2025, the main accused, Aaqib Javed, came to the house and forcibly abducted his daughter at gunpoint. The report also noted that gold jewellery and approximately one lakh rupees were looted from the house during the incident. The victim's family asserted that their daughter was lured with inducements, forced to convert to Islam and marry, and that she was being held hostage. The police registered a First Information Report under Sections 87, 142, 305, and 127(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, and Sections 3 and 5 of the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, 2025. The case was being investigated by Station House Officer Guru Bhupendra Singh. Meanwhile, Sunil Udeiya, founder of the Brahmin Mahasabha, and Advocate Anil Chaturvedi, head of the Parashuram Sena, met with Deputy Commissioner of Police South, Rajarshi, along with the victim’s family, demanding the arrest of the accused youths. The Deputy Commissioner assured the family that the complaint was being taken seriously, stating that a special investigation team had been formed and the accused would be arrested soon.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category selected in this case is- Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes. The subcategory selected is- Forced conversion before marriage. The tertiary category selected is- Forced to do Nikah. 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, however, at some point during the relationship, the non-Hindu man starts to force the victim to convert her 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 her religion and give up her religious identity. In both the 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 pressurizing 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. Another primary category selected is- Predatory Proselytisation. The subcategory selected is- Attempting to convert/converting by denigrating Hinduism. In several cases, Hindus are converted or an attempt is made to convert Hindus by denigrating their faith, Hinduism. In such cases, the Hindus associate with the non-Hindu perpetrators often by choice and then, the attempt to convert them by insulting their faith, showing the faith down etc begins. An example of this would be a non-Hindu gathering where the Hindus are attending the gathering of their own free will. However, once they attend the gathering, there is an explicit attempt to convert them by abusing their faith and hailing the faith of the perpetrator. The denigration of the Hindu faith is often based on misrepresentation of the Hindu faith, its doctrine and scriptures and insult to espoused traditions if not blatant lies about Hindu beliefs and ways. Such conversions or attempts at conversions are driven by animosity towards the Hindu faith and are therefore documented as religiously motivated hate crimes. The other subcategory selected is- Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation, or subtle indoctrination. The tertiary category selected is- Family claims Grooming. 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. The other 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- Conversion/attempts to convert by inducements. Predatory Proselytisation is not just limited to threat, harassment, force and violence, but it also has contours of stealth. In several cases, the Hindu victim is exploited to convert, with non-Hindus taking advantage of their poverty. In such cases, the Hindu victim who is suffering financially is offered monetary benefits, including lucrative offers for jobs, health treatment, education, etc, to induce the victim into changing his/her religion. In such cases, the religious identity of the victim and the aim to disenfranchise him from his faith form the heart of the crime. Also, taking advantage of and exploiting an individual’s economic vulnerabilities is widely acknowledged as exploitation, forms of which are often penalised by law. Such cases therefore are considered religiously motivated hate crimes since the victim’s religious identity forms the very heart of the crime itself. This case represents a clear instance of an anti-Hindu hate crime against a Hindu woman, as the Muslim perpetrators first befriended her and then targeted her for forced religious conversion and marriage. The accused manipulated the victim by denigrating Hinduism and promoting the supposed supremacy of Islam, exposing deep-seated religious animosity towards the Hindu community. The fact that they entrapped the victim through friendship and subsequently compelled her to convert to Islam and marry (Nikah) demonstrates a premeditated effort to forcibly convert her, rooted in religious hostility. The conversion was not the result of genuine conviction but was achieved through external pressure, coercion, and manipulation, which categorically qualifies this as an anti-Hindu hate crime fuelled by religious animosity. Prior to abducting the victim, the accused deliberately denigrated Hinduism to manipulate her conversion to Islam. This intentional disrespect for the Hindu faith and its followers constitutes a religiously motivated crime. Employing religious denigration as a method to enforce conversion illustrates the profound hostility the accused harboured, not only against the victim's personal faith but also against the wider Hindu community. This blatant contempt confirms the hateful nature of the crime, rooted unmistakably in religious animosity. The manipulation of the Hindu victim through the assertion of Islam’s supposed supremacy, combined with disparagement of Hinduism, demonstrates how coercion was used as a tool to force conversion. This clearly constitutes a religiously motivated hate crime. Using manipulation and indoctrination to enforce forced conversions is a deliberate attempt to strip the victim of her Hindu identity, amounting to a serious, religiously motivated offence. Furthermore, abducting the victim at gunpoint and compelling her to convert underscores the deep-seated religious animosity of the accused. The use of force and coercion to impose Islam violates the victim’s religious autonomy and beliefs, marking this as a grave, religiously motivated offence. The victim’s father also confirmed that the accused offered inducements to persuade her to convert to Islam. In such contexts, inducements are not acts of goodwill; they operate as coercive tools that exploit vulnerabilities to secure conversion. Utilising inducements in this way constitutes a clear form of coercion and a religiously motivated hate crime rooted in anti-Hindu animosity. Such predatory conversions stem from deep-rooted doctrinal hostility towards Hindus, as Abrahamic faiths often exhibit contempt and hostility towards non-believers until conversion occurs. This doctrinal animosity fosters an emphasis on conversions by manipulation, coercion, or force. This case exemplifies this pattern of doctrinal hostility towards Hindus, making it a religiously motivated offence. Therefore, this case is being recorded in the Hate Crime Database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records the dates of incidents based on when the crime occurred rather than when it is reported by the media. In this case, media reports have not specified the exact date when the victim’s ordeal began. Two key time references are noted: 27th November 2025, when the Muslim accused abducted the victim at gunpoint, and the information that the perpetrators lured the victim into a friendship approximately two years earlier. Based on these details, 27th November 2023 has been selected as the indicative date of the incident for documentation purposes only.
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 0
- Adult 1
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 0
Case Status
Complaint registered
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 2 To 5
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
