Minor Hindu girl lured, assaulted, and abducted for religious conversion by Muslim man; victim’s father assaulted and hurled casteist abuse
Farrukhabad, Uttar Pradesh, India 
29 October, 2025
Case Summary
In the Merapur area of Farrukhabad, Uttar Pradesh, a 15-year-old Hindu girl belonging to a Scheduled Caste family was lured, assaulted, and abducted for religious conversion by a Muslim man. When the victim’s father confronted the accused’s family, they hurled casteist abuses and physically assaulted him, declaring that they abduct Hindu girls and convert them to Islam. According to the victim’s father, the accused, who lived in the same village, had physically and sexually assaulted his minor daughter before taking her away late at night on 30 October 2025. The accused also stole ₹80,000 in cash along with jewellery belonging to the victim’s mother. During the abduction, he was assisted by his father and five other relatives. When the girl’s father later confronted the accused at his residence in an attempt to rescue his daughter, the Muslim family assaulted him, hurled casteist slurs, and pelted stones at his house, narrowly missing him. The victim's father further stated that the perpetrators boasted of abducting Hindu girls and converting them to Islam. Following the incident, the minor Hindu girl's father lodged a formal complaint with the police, based on which a case was registered. As of the date of writing this report, police initiated an investigation into the incident, rescued the missing girl and apprehended the culprits.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category in this case is: Predatory Proselytisation. The first subcategory under this 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. The second sub-category selected here is - Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination, with the tertiary category being - Conversion of minor, Rape and sexual assault/harassment and Pattern of targeting Hindus. 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 second primary category selected here is - Attack not resulting in death. Within it, the sub-category selected here is - Attacked for Hindu identity. In several cases, Hindus are attacked merely for their Hindu identity without any perceived provocation. A classic example of this category of religiously motivated hate crime is a murder in 2016. 7 ISIS terrorists were convicted for shooting a school principal in Kanpur because they got ‘triggered’ seeing the Kalava on his wrist and tilak that he had put. In this, the Hindu victim had offered no provocation except for his Hindu religious identity. The motivation for the murder was purely religious, driven by religious supremacy. Such cases where Hindus are targeted merely for their religious identity would be documented as a hate crime under this category. The other sub-category selected here is - Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim. In several cases, Hindus are attacked for opposing religiously motivated crimes being committed against a fellow Hindu or simply for voicing an opinion opposing radical elements, who either have in the past or continue to persecute Hindus. In such cases, the initial attack against the victim, against which the Hindu was trying to defend the victim, would also need to be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime. Since the initial crime itself was religiously motivated and the subsequent crime of attempting to save the victim or speaking against the radical elements ends up inviting a violent attack, it would also be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime under this category. The third primary category selected here is - Hate speech against Hindus. Within it, the sub-category selected is - Anti-Hindu slurs, mocking faith. Anti-Hindu slurs and the deliberate mocking of the Hindu faith owing to religious animosity involve the usage of derogatory terms, stereotypes, or offensive references to religious practices, symbols, or figures. One of the common anti-Hindu slurs used against Hindus is “cow-worshipper” and “cow piss drinker”. The intention of using this term is to demean and mock Hindus as a group and their religious beliefs since Hindus consider the cow holy. Additionally, some symbols and the slurs attached to them have a historical context that exacerbates the insult, hate, stereotyping, dehumanisation and oppression against Hindus. Cow worship has been used for centuries to denigrate Hindus, insult their faith and oppress Hindus specifically as a religious group. There has been overwhelming documentation about how cow slaughter has been used to persecute Hindus with cow meat being thrown in temples and places of worship. There has also been overwhelming documentation where cow meat (beef) has been force-fed to Hindus to either forcefully convert them to Islam or denigrate their faith. Apart from cow worship, the Swastika – which holds deep religious significance for the Hindus – has also been misinterpreted and distorted to use as a slur against Hindus. Similarly, the worship of the Shivling has been used by supremacist ideologies and religions to denigrate Hindus owing to religious animosity. Such slurs and denigration stem out of inherent animosity and hate towards Hindus and their faith, therefore, it is categorised as hate speech targeted at Hindus specifically owing to their religious identity. This case has been added to the tracker because a minor Hindu girl was lured, assaulted, and abducted for religious conversion by the Muslim accused. The accused's family even boasted of targeting and abducting Hindu girls with the explicit intent of converting them to Islam. Firstly, it is important to note here that the victim was a minor, 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. Further, 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 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 her volition. Secondly, the victim was sexually and physically assaulted before being abducted. In such cases, sexual or physical violence often serves a dual purpose: physical subjugation and religious humiliation. The intention is to break the victim down emotionally, physically, and spiritually, making her more susceptible to conversion. This was not random violence; it was systematic, targeted, and rooted in religious hostility. Even the abduction was aimed at isolating her from her social circle and cultural identity, thereby facilitating her conversion. Thirdly, the victim’s father stated that the accused’s family boasted of abducting Hindu girls and converting them to Islam. This declaration demonstrates that the actions were not isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern of predatory behaviour targeting Hindu women and girls for conversion. This reinforces that the harassment, sexual exploitation, and coercion were systematic, targeted, and motivated by animosity towards the victim’s Hindu identity. 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. Fourth, when the victim’s father confronted the accused’s family, he was physically assaulted and subjected to casteist abuse. It could be argued that the caste-specific slur targeted his micro-identity as a Dalit Hindu rather than his broader Hindu identity. However, as far as Abrahamic religions are concerned, the micro identities of caste, region, and language are secondary. It is the religious identity that drives the animosity of the perpetrator against the Hindu victim. In this case, while the accused's family hurled caste abuses at the victim's father, the animosity was driven by his animosity towards Hinduism and Hindus. The fact that caste slurs were hurled at the victim by the perpetrator makes it a religiously motivated hate crime against the victim Fifth, the assault on the victim’s father by the accused’s family was not merely personal vengeance; it was punishment for resisting an attempt at religious conversion. It served as a warning to the wider Hindu community that opposing such actions would invite violent retribution. The attack on the victim’s father, combined with casteist abuse, represents a coordinated effort to enforce compliance through fear, reinforcing the hate-driven and ideological nature of the crime. This case, therefore, fulfils multiple criteria and has thus been documented in the Hinduphobia Tracker as a clear instance of a religiously motivated hate crime.
Victim Details
Total Victim
2
Deceased
0
Gender
- Male 1
- Female 1
- Third Gender 0
- Unknown 0
Caste
- SC/ST 2
- OBC 0
- General 0
- Unknown 0
Age Group
- Minor 1
- Adult 1
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 0
Case Status
Complaint registered
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 5 to 10
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
