Hindu woman deceived into marriage and pressured to convert by Muslim man disguising as Hindu; threatened with death for resisting
Maharajganj, Uttar Pradesh, India 
19 November, 2016
Case Summary
A Hindu woman was deceived into marriage by a man who hid his Muslim identity and later subjected her to persistent pressure to change her religion. She reported that she had married Shahban alias Shahnawaz about nine years earlier, believing him to be Hindu, and only discovered the truth after the wedding. The revelation left her alarmed, yet she remained in the marriage because his initial behaviour, and that of his family, appeared restrained. She stated that this changed gradually. According to her account, her husband and his relatives began insisting that she convert to Islam and turned increasingly abusive when she refused. She described being beaten, verbally degraded and threatened with death for resisting the demands placed upon her. She also stated that her father-in-law and brother-in-law behaved towards her with improper intent, creating a climate of fear inside the household. The woman further claimed that her husband maintained an illicit relationship with a female relative and that two men from the extended family, Mumtaz and Nasim alias Bablu, tried to lure her with promises that her life would improve if she accepted conversion. She asserted that these men also threatened to kill her and dispose of her body in Nepal if she did not comply. In her complaint filed at the Sonouli police station, she named five accused: her husband Shahban, her father-in-law Laddan, her brother-in-law and the two relatives. The police confirmed that an FIR had been registered based on her written statement.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category in this case is: Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes. The first subcategory under this is: Man pretends to be Hindu. The tertiary category under this is: Marries as per Hindu rituals. When a non-Hindu man pretends to be a Hindu to deceive a Hindu woman into a relationship, the act is seen as triggered by malafide intentions. In some cases, the woman eventually accepts the man’s original religious identity and converts after the man’s identity is revealed. These cases could be argued as cases of religious brainwashing and a result of the pressure a woman feels after getting into a relationship with a man. The woman, it can be argued, also changed her religious identity because of the stigma she believes she might face if she chooses to walk out of a deceptive relationship. However, for the purpose of documenting hate crimes, the cases in this subcategory are limited to those where there is explicit violence aimed at religious conversion against the wishes of the victim (force-feeding beef, blackmailing with intimate videos, rape on refusal to convert, etc), or if the woman herself complains of the man’s religious deception. In such cases, it is established that the deception of the non-Hindu man had a specific aim of religious conversion or targeting of the victim due to her Hindu religious identity, therefore, making it a religiously motivated hate crime. The second subcategory under this 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 third subcategory under this is: Assault or threat upon refusal to convert. When Hindu women are in a relationship with non-Hindu men, there are cases where the woman faces threats or assault after she refuses to convert and change her religious identity owing to pressure/force by the non-Hindu man. Such relationships may be consensual with the religious identity of the non-Hindu man known to the victim. Somewhere along the relationship, the non-Hindu man starts pressurizing the Hindu woman to convert to Islam and upon her refusal, assaults or threatens the victim. Such cases are driven by specific religious motivations and against the religious identity of the victim and are therefore qualified as hate crimes. Cases where the Hindu woman converts to Islam and does not file a complaint about the force or threat, are not considered a part of the hate tracker, even though, it may be argued that the woman was brainwashed or threatened to convert to Islam. Another primary category in this case is: Predatory Proselytisation. The subcategory under this is: Conversion/ attempts to convert by inducement. 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 has been added to the tracker because the woman’s account shows a pattern in which religious deception, coercion and intimidation were used to undermine her Hindu identity across several years of marriage. The sequence begins with a deliberate concealment of religious affiliation to secure the relationship, which immediately places the victim at a disadvantage. Once the truth emerged, she was already bound by social, emotional and marital ties, reducing her ability to withdraw without facing stigma or harm. This initial deception is significant because it shaped every subsequent form of pressure. Her testimony describes a gradual shift from ordinary domestic interaction to a sustained effort to push her away from her Hindu identity. The insistence that she convert did not appear as a passing remark but as a recurring demand accompanied by violence, verbal humiliation and threats to her life. These actions indicate that the aim was not simply to dominate the household but to compel a specific religious outcome. When religious pressure is paired with the threat of physical harm, it acquires a form that is recognised as targeting the victim’s faith rather than her behaviour. The revelations involving her husband’s relatives reinforce this interpretation. She reported that multiple members of the family applied pressure, suggesting a collective intention rather than an isolated personal conflict. The use of inducements, such as assurances that life would improve if she changed her religion, shows the presence of manipulation alongside coercion. Threats to kill her and dump her body across the border intensify the atmosphere of fear and demonstrate why her religious refusal placed her in danger. The harm she faced was explicitly linked to her unwillingness to abandon her Hindu identity. These features collectively show why the case qualifies as a hate crime against Hindus. The targeting was not random, nor was it motivated by material gain or ordinary domestic disagreements. The pressure was directed at her because she remained Hindu, and the violence followed when she resisted conversion. Her religious identity was framed as something to be eliminated, replaced or punished. This is the defining element that positions the events as hostility aimed at a Hindu individual, specifically because of her faith. The case has therefore been included in the tracker because it demonstrates intentional deception, coercive pressure to convert, and threats tied directly to the victim’s refusal to abandon her religion. Disclaimer: Media reports indicate that the victim’s ordeal began around nine years ago, though no specific date or month has been mentioned. For documentation purposes, we have used an indicative date, 20 November 2016, as a placeholder to represent the start of her suffering. Although the incident came to light through media coverage in 2025, the Hinduphobia Tracker records the case based on when the harm to the Hindu victim began, not when it was later reported.
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 
