Minor Hindu boy lured with inducements, brainwashed, and forcibly converted to Islam in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh

Case ID : 99584dc | Location : Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Mon, 28 August, 2006

Case ID : 99584dc

Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, India

28 August, 2006

Minor Hindu boy lured with inducements, brainwashed, and forcibly converted to Islam in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh

Predatory Proselytisation

Conversion/ attempts to convert by inducement

Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination

Family claims grooming

Conversion of minor

Case Summary

In Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, a 17-year-old Hindu boy named Dayaram was offered inducements, brainwashed, and forcibly converted to Islam by members of the Muslim community. According to reports, in 2006, the minor boy grew up in poverty but remained the hope of his family, which consisted of four brothers and three sisters. When one brother passed away, he left his home in search of a livelihood and began working at a cloth shop in the city, which was owned by Muslims. Gradually, members of the Muslim community started influencing the minor Hindu boy towards religious conversion. He was offered a house and a shop if he converted to Islam. Step by step, his Hindu identity was dismantled, he was subtly indoctrinated, and slowly led to believe that his real identity was someone else. He was then circumcised and kept in the Miyan Sarai area, where he was given Islamic education in a madrassa. Even his name was changed to Tauheed Ahmed, along with a new Aadhar card (identity card) showing him as the son of a Delhi resident, Tasleem Ahmed. Over time, his appearance also changed, with a beard on his face and a cap on his head. His siblings tried repeatedly to bring him back home, but every attempt failed, as the Hindu boy said that he was forbidden, despite his wish to be among his loved ones again. The family tried approaching local police and even reaching the DIG Moradabad, but to no avail.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category- Predatory Proselytisation. Within this, the 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. The other subcategory selected in this case is- Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination. The tertiary category selected in this case is- Family claims grooming 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 has been added to the tracker because a minor Hindu boy was offered inducements, brainwashed and forcibly converted to Islam by members of the Muslim community. He was offered a house and a shop for conversion. A person who grew up in poverty, a lure of a shop and a house is essentially a manipulative tactic designed to exploit the economic vulnerability of the victim. Offering incentives for conversion, especially when directed at vulnerable individuals in need, shows that these incentives are not acts of kindness or charity. Instead, they are calculated moves to exploit vulnerable Hindus because of their religion. By providing inducements in exchange for conversion, the Muslim community was effectively blackmailing the minor boy, who was desperate for assistance. The Hindu boy was taken to a madrassa and given religious education. He was brainwashed and indoctrinated to a point that when his family tried to bring him back, he did not return, saying that he was forbidden. Even his Hindu name was taken away from him, and he was given a Muslim name, Tauheed. This was yet another attempt by the Muslim community to sever any ties that the victim had towards his Hindu identity. Such acts are deeply rooted in religious animosity towards Hindu victims and their faith, making it a religiously motivated crime. Further, the victim was also circumcised. Though circumcision is not a prerequisite to converting to Islam, however, it is often seen that it is used as an intimidatory tactic to make the Hindu victim abandon his/her professed religion and adopt the religion of the perpetrator. This sort of harassment is rooted in animosity towards the victim’s religious identity and is therefore documented as a religiously motivated hate crime in this Hindu hate tracker. It is important to note here that the victim was a minor when he was converted, 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. Such acts are not merely criminal in nature; they are ideologically charged, revealing religious prejudice and a calculated intent to alter the religious identity of a minor without his volition. 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 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: Media reports state that the victim's ordeal began when he left his home in 2006 and began working at a shop owned by Muslims, though no exact date or month is provided. Thus, to document this case, we have used an indicative date—August 29, 2006—as a placeholder to represent the beginning of her suffering. While media coverage of the incident emerged on August 29, 2025, the Hinduphobia Tracker records the incident based on when the victim’s ordeal began, not when it was reported. Furthermore, the victim has been regarded as a minor since he was 17 at the time his ordeal began.