Hindu girl blackmailed with private pictures and coerced into marriage by Muslim youth posing as Hindu

Case ID : d327bc5 | Location : Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Fri, 20 February, 2026

Case ID : d327bc5

Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

20 February, 2026

Hindu girl blackmailed with private pictures and coerced into marriage by Muslim youth posing as Hindu

Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes

Man pretends to be Hindu

Forced conversion before marriage

Blackmailed to convert

Case Summary

A Hindu girl from the Mirzapur area of Janakipuram, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh was blackmailed into agreeing to marry a Muslim youth named Nafees Khan after he concealed his Muslim identity to enter into a relationship with her, recorded objectionable photographs and videos of her without her consent, and threatened to make the material viral if she refused to marry him. The girl’s family stated that police failed to take their complaint seriously at first, registering only a General Diary entry rather than a First Information Report. Following a protest at the police station by the girl’s family members along with workers from Bajrang Dal and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a case was finally registered against Nafees Khan. Nafees Khan concealed his Muslim identity and entered into a romantic relationship with the Hindu girl under false pretences. During the course of the relationship, he recorded objectionable photographs and videos of the Hindu girl without her consent. He then used this material as a tool of blackmail, threatening to make the photographs and videos viral on social media if the Hindu girl refused to marry him. The girl’s brother, Sahil Sharma, stated that Nafees Khan directly threatened their sister, warning that if she did not agree to marry him, he would release the objectionable material publicly. As a result of this sustained blackmail and the threat of public humiliation through the viral spread of the objectionable material, the Hindu girl was coerced into agreeing to marry Nafees Khan against her will. The girl’s family filed a complaint at Janakipuram Police Station on 21 February, but police initially registered only a General Diary entry rather than a formal First Information Report. The girl was counselled by the police, but no action was taken against Nafees Khan at that time. When no action was taken, family members arrived at the police station with Bajrang Dal and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh workers and staged a protest against the police administration’s inaction. The protest continued late into the night and subsided only after a case was formally registered. Janakipuram Police registered a case against the named accused on the written complaint of the girl’s brother, Sahil Sharma, under relevant sections of the law. Station in-charge Vinod Tiwari confirmed that the matter was under investigation and stated that appropriate legal action would be taken. He also confirmed that a case had been registered and that the police had addressed the matter.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The primary category for this case is "Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes". The sub-category here is "Man pretends to be Hindu". 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. Another sub-category here is "Forced conversion before marriage". In such cases, a non-Hindu man is in a relationship with a Hindu woman when the pressure to convert her religion begins to manifest. 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, however, at some point during the relationship, the non-Hindu man starts to force the victim to convert her religion and give up her Hindu religious identity. 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 the situations, the methods used to force the victim to convert her religion often revolve around force-feeding beef, forcing her to wear hijab, forcing her 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 a Hindu woman 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 here is "Blackmailed to convert". When Hindu women are in a relationship with non-Hindu men, there are cases where the woman is blackmailed to convert her religion, owing to her religious identity of being a Hindu. 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 man starts blackmailing a Hindu woman to convert her religion. In these cases, it is often seen that the Hindu woman is blackmailed with intimate photos and/or videos, threats of harm to her or her 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 incident qualifies as a religiously motivated hate crime because a Hindu girl in Lucknow was deliberately targeted through deception, manipulation, and coercion by a Muslim youth who concealed his religious identity to initiate a romantic relationship with her. The relationship did not develop through transparent and informed consent. Instead, the perpetrator deliberately misrepresented his identity to gain the Hindu victim’s trust and emotional involvement. Once the relationship was established, the perpetrator recorded objectionable photos and videos of the Hindu girl without her consent and later used this material as a tool of blackmail. The threats to release the material publicly unless the Hindu victim agreed to marry him created a sustained environment of intimidation and coercion that stripped the Hindu victim of her autonomy and placed her under severe psychological pressure. The concealment of religious identity at the outset of the relationship demonstrates a calculated form of predatory behaviour directed at the Hindu victim. By presenting himself under a false identity, the Muslim perpetrator removed the Hindu girl’s ability to make an informed decision about entering into the relationship. This deception allowed the perpetrator to gain the Hindu victim’s trust and emotional attachment under false pretences. Such conduct is not an incidental detail of the case but a foundational element of the crime, as the relationship itself was initiated through deliberate misrepresentation. The intentional concealment of religious identity created the conditions that allowed the perpetrator to manipulate the Hindu victim and place her in a vulnerable position that he later exploited. The facts of the case further demonstrate that once the relationship had developed and the Hindu victim had placed her trust in him, the perpetrator secretly recorded objectionable photos and videos of her without her consent. The creation of such material without the Hindu victim’s knowledge or consent indicates a deliberate effort to obtain leverage over her. This behaviour reflects a calculated process of manipulation where trust was first established and then exploited to place the Hindu victim under control. The use of blackmail through the threat of releasing objectionable photos and videos represents a direct form of coercion against the Hindu victim. The Muslim perpetrator threatened to make the material viral on social media if the Hindu girl refused to marry him. In many social contexts, particularly in conservative environments, the public dissemination of such material can cause severe reputational harm, social ostracisation, and psychological trauma for the victim. By threatening to expose the Hindu girl to such consequences, the perpetrator created a situation in which refusal became extremely difficult. The Hindu victim was placed under sustained pressure where her dignity, privacy, and social standing were weaponised against her in order to force compliance with the perpetrator’s demands. The threats directed at the Hindu victim also constitute intimidation designed to compel her to submit to the perpetrator’s demands. The Muslim perpetrator explicitly warned that the objectionable material would be made public if the Hindu girl did not agree to marry him. This threat placed the Hindu victim in a position where her refusal would result in immediate personal and social harm. Such intimidation represents a direct attempt to override the Hindu victim’s agency through fear. The coercive nature of these threats demonstrates that the agreement to marry was not a product of free and voluntary consent but rather the result of sustained pressure and intimidation. The case also demonstrates how crimes within intimate relationships can take on a targeted dimension when deception, manipulation, and coercion are used against Hindu women. The Hindu victim was subjected to a pattern of behaviour that involved misrepresentation, emotional manipulation, the recording of private material without consent, and the use of that material as a weapon of coercion. These acts collectively created an environment in which the Hindu girl’s autonomy was systematically undermined. The victim’s vulnerability was exploited not only through the emotional dynamics of the relationship but also through threats designed to damage her social standing and dignity. Family members of the Hindu victim also recognised the manipulative and coercive nature of the perpetrator’s conduct. The Hindu girl’s brother reported that the Muslim perpetrator deceived the Hindu victim about his identity, developed a relationship with her under false pretences, and later used objectionable material to pressure her into marriage. The family’s description of the situation as grooming and manipulation reflects their recognition that the Hindu victim had been gradually placed under psychological pressure and control. Their intervention and protest at the police station further demonstrates the seriousness with which the family viewed the coercion and intimidation directed at the Hindu girl. The broader impact of such incidents also extends beyond the individual victim. Cases involving deception, grooming, and coercion directed at Hindu women create fear and insecurity within the wider community. When a Hindu victim is manipulated into a relationship under false identity and later subjected to blackmail and intimidation, it sends a message that deception and coercion can be used as tools to control vulnerable individuals. This can contribute to a climate of fear where families become concerned about the safety and vulnerability of Hindu women in interpersonal relationships, particularly when deception is used to initiate those relationships. Taken together, the deliberate concealment of religious identity, the establishment of a relationship through deception, the recording of objectionable material without consent, and the use of that material as a tool of blackmail and intimidation demonstrate a pattern of targeted manipulation and coercion directed at a Hindu victim. The Hindu girl was deprived of the ability to make free and informed decisions about her personal life and was instead placed under sustained pressure designed to force compliance with the perpetrator’s demands. Given that this case meets the parameters of a religiously motivated hate crime, it is being added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when a crime occurred, or a victim's ordeal began, rather than when the media reported it. In this case, the exact date on which Nafees Khan began grooming the Hindu girl or first recorded the objectionable photos and videos without her consent is not confirmed in the sources. Therefore, February 21, 2026, has been chosen as the indicative incident date, as it represents the date on which the Hindu girl's family filed a formal complaint at Janakipuram police station, making it the earliest confirmed and documented action taken in response to the blackmail and coercion campaign directed at the Hindu girl. This was recorded for documentation purposes only.