Minor Hindu boy abducted, held hostage, targeted for forced conversion and circumcision by Muslim man

Case ID : 5c27894 | Location : Hamirpur, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Tue, 16 December, 2025

Case ID : 5c27894

Hamirpur, Uttar Pradesh, India

16 December, 2025

Minor Hindu boy abducted, held hostage, targeted for forced conversion and circumcision by Muslim man

Predatory Proselytisation

Harassment, threats, coercion for conversion

Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination

Conversion of minor

Case Summary

In the Artara village of Hamirpur district, Uttar Pradesh, a Hindu man named Amit Anurag stated that his wife, Sangeeta, and his minor son were abducted, held hostage, and forcibly converted to Islam by a Muslim man named Sikandar. The Hindu man, Amit Anurag, got married to Sangeeta on 6 April 2021, after which Sangeeta gave birth to a son, Sumit. Due to an illness, Sangeeta returned to her father's house in Artara village, along with her son. On 17 December 2025, when Amit visited Artara village to meet his wife and child, he discovered that both were being kept at the residence of a Muslim man named Sikandar in Maudaha town. It was revealed that Sangeeta and her child were abducted by Sikandar, who held them hostage and forcibly converted them to Islam. When Amit went to Sikandar’s house to bring his wife and child back, he was threatened and chased away. Subsequently, Amit Anurag filed a complaint with the police stating that Sikandar had forcibly confined Sangeeta, converted her to Islam, and kept both her and the child hostage. He also stated that the accused was planning to circumcise the minor child against the family’s wishes. Following the submission of the complaint to the Circle Officer and the police station, Maudaha Kotwali Inspector-in-Charge Santosh Singh confirmed that a case had been registered against the accused. As of the date of writing this report, the investigation was ongoing.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category- Predatory Proselytisation. Within it, the sub-category 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 sub-category selected is - Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination, with the tertiary category being - Pattern of targeting Hindus and Rape and sexual assault/harassment. 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 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 has been added to the tracker because a Hindu woman and her minor child were abducted, held hostage, and pressured for religious conversion by the Muslim accused, Sikandar. The accused abducted the Hindu woman and her child, held them hostage and forcibly converted them to Islam. Firstly, it is important to note here that Sumit was a minor at the time of his conversion, 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. Furthermore, the accused was also planning to circumcise the minor victim. The forced circumcision is another deeply disturbing element that underlines the religious animosity of the act. Circumcision is irreversible. For a Hindu boy, it is not a cultural or religious practice and carrying it out without his consent is a direct attack on his religious identity. By doing so, the perpetrators ensured that the child bears the lifelong physical and symbolic marker of forced Islamic conversion. This was not only an assault on his bodily autonomy but also on his Hindu faith, demonstrating a targeted act of hatred against his religion, Hinduism. 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. Therefore, religious conversions, even of minors, are often seen as a badge of honour, totally disregarding the methods used to achieve it. 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: 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 17 December 2025, when Amit went to Sikandar's house. 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 17 December 2025, though the media reported the incident on 20 December 2025. Disclaimer: The Hindu man, Amit Anurag, stated that his wife, Sangeeta, and their minor child were abducted by the accused, Sikandar, who forcibly converted them to Islam. It is important to note that Sangeeta was an adult at the time of the incident, thus was legally free to make her own decisions, including those related to religious conversion or elopement. As Sangeeta's statement was not available at the time of documentation, the perpetrator count has been recorded as one, only including the minor child, Sumit. The minor was subjected to conversion without parental consent, rendering the act non-consensual and coercive in nature.