Case Summary

In the Izzatnagar police station limits in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, a Hindu school teacher and his family were subjected to physical violence, coercion, extortion, and threats to convert in order to proceed with a marriage alliance. Hinduphobia Tracker obtained a copy of the FIR. The victim, Manoj Kumar, is a primary school teacher and belongs to a Scheduled Caste and follows Hindu dharma. According to the complaint filed by his mother, Somwati Devi, the family had fixed his marriage with the daughter of Omkar Singh from Budaun. After the engagement and traditional godh bharai rituals were completed, the groom and his mother began to receive pressure from the girl’s family to abandon Hinduism and convert. The FIR and accompanying complaint reveal that Omkar Singh, along with his wife Sadawati Gautam, daughters Uma Gautam and Madhu Gautam, son Vimal Gautam, son-in-law Anshul, and Dr. Suryaprakash Gautam—an associate professor at a degree college in Budaun—demanded that Manoj Kumar leave Hindu dharma. They threatened that if he did not convert, the marriage would be called off, and a false dowry case would be filed against him and his family. Additionally, they demanded ₹10 lakh if he refused to renounce his faith. The situation escalated further when the accused came to Manoj’s residence multiple times and physically assaulted him. The victim and his mother were mentally harassed and intimidated over several days. Left with no option, Somwati Devi approached the police and filed a complaint naming seven individuals. The Izzatnagar Police registered a case under relevant sections including 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506 (criminal intimidation), 384 (extortion), 452 (house-trespass after preparation for hurt), and 153A (promoting enmity on grounds of religion), among others. At the time of writing this report, the investigation was ongoing.

Case Images

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker un the primary category of - Men attacked for being associated with non-Hindu women. The other sub-category selected is - Forced to before marriage. In such cases, a non-Hindu woman is in a relationship with a Hindu man when the force/pressure against the Hindu man to convert his religion begins to manifest. The relationship in such cases is mostly consensual and the religious identity of the perpetrator is known to the Hindu man in the relationship, however, at some point during the relationship, the non-Hindu woman starts to force/pressure the victim to convert his religion and give up his Hindu identity. In such cases, the methods used to force/pressure the victim to convert his religion often revolve around forcing/pressurizing the man to involuntarily consume beef, forced circumcision, forcing/pressurizing 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 the Hindu man 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. The other sub-category selected is - Threatened to convert by family of partner. When Hindu men are in a relationship with non-Hindu women, there are cases where the man faces threats to convert and change his religious identity by the non-Hindu woman or her family. Such relationships may be consensual with the religious identity of the non-Hindu woman known to the victim. Somewhere along the relationship, the non-Hindu woman or her family starts forcing/pressurizing the Hindu man to convert to Islam and also assaults the victim to force him to convert. 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 man 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 man was brainwashed or threatened to convert to Islam. The other sub-category selected is - Blackmailed to convert. When Hindu men are in a relationship with non-Hindu women, there are cases where the man is blackmailed to convert his religion. Such relationships may be consensual with the religious identity of the non-Hindu man known to the victim, however, there could be cases where the relationship is not consensual and the non-Hindu woman starts blackmailing a Hindu man to convert his religion. In these cases, it is often seen that the Hindu man is blackmailed with intimate photos and/or videos, threats of harm to his family, threats of violence etc. Such cases are driven by specific religious motivations and against the religious identity of the victim and are therefore qualified as hate crimes. The other sub-category selected is - Assaulted for refusal to convert. When Hindu men are in a relationship with non-Hindu women, there are cases where the Hindu man faces assault after he refuses to convert and change his religious identity owing to pressure/force by the non-Hindu woman or her family. Such relationships may be consensual with the religious identity of the non-Hindu woman known to the victim. Somewhere along the relationship, the non-Hindu woman or her family starts forcing/pressurizing the Hindu man to convert to Islam and upon his refusal, assaults 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 man 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 man was brainwashed or threatened to convert to Islam. The other sub-category selected is - Torture of family to force man to convert. When Hindu men are in a relationship with non-Hindu women, there are cases where the Hindu spouse is forced to convert his religion. Several methods are used for such forced conversion. The non-Hindu woman and/or her family, and religious leaders are often documented to issue threats and even employ violence. One of the ways used by such perpetrators is threatening and/or torturing the family members of the Hindu man to pressure him to convert. The perpetrators in such cases issue threats to harm or torture the family of the man. In some cases, there is also violence directed towards the family in order to force the Hindu man to convert. The aim of such crimes is to blackmail the victim into changing his religion by inducing fear of harm to his family. Such cases are driven by specific religious motivations and against the religious identity of the victim and are therefore qualified as hate crimes. In this case, a clear condition was placed before the victim: unless he converted, the marriage would not take place. This was not presented as a personal preference but as a non-negotiable demand by the girl’s family. Such imposition of religious conversion as a precondition for marriage reflects an attempt to forcibly change one’s faith to meet communal expectations. It is coercive, not consensual, and hence it is a hate crime. The pressure to convert did not come from society at large or random aggressors—it came from the woman’s immediate family: her father, mother, brother, and brother-in-law. They repeatedly told Manoj and his family that the marriage would only proceed if he abandoned Hindu dharma. The threats were not only verbal but also included emotional blackmail, legal threats (false dowry case), and financial extortion. When Manoj refused to convert, the girl’s family escalated the pressure by demanding ₹10 lakh from his family, failing which they would file a false dowry case. This financial demand was not about any dowry dispute, but tied directly to the refusal to convert. This constitutes religious blackmail—using financial and legal threats to compel someone to change their religion. It goes beyond emotional coercion and enters the realm of structured extortion with a communal motive. The FIR records incidents of physical assault on Manoj Kumar by the accused after he refused to give up his religion. These assaults were not random or part of a domestic quarrel; they occurred only after he stood firm in his Hindu beliefs. The use of violence in response to someone’s refusal to convert makes the motive explicitly religious and communal. Assault used as a tool of religious coercion fits squarely under the definition of hate crime. The perpetrators not only targeted the individual but also directed threats and violence towards his mother, using fear and intimidation as tools to force a religious conversion. It represents a deliberate attempt to inflict emotional and physical pressure on the victim by targeting his closest family member. The perpetrators aimed to break his resistance and force him to abandon his religion under duress. Such an act is not incidental violence—it is a calculated method of coercion, using fear for a loved one’s safety to manipulate the victim's choices. This tactic reflects a clear intent to achieve religious conversion through intimidation and family-based torture, making it a textbook example of a hate crime driven by the victim’s religious identity. Hence, this case qualifies as a hate crime because the violence, threats, and coercion directed at the Hindu victim were solely motivated by his refusal to abandon his religion. The actions of the accused—pressuring for conversion, issuing legal and financial threats, and resorting to assault—were driven by religious intolerance, making the crime inherently communal in nature. Disclaimer: It is important to clarify that the report does not specify the exact date when the victim's ordeal began, but the FIR mentions that the accused assaulted the victim on 22nd June, 2025. Since this is the earliest date mentioned, we are considering this as when the victim's ordeal began and using this as the incident date. While media coverage of the incident emerged later, the Hinduphobia Tracker records the incident based on when the victim’s ordeal began, not when it was reported.