Hindu woman and her minor child pressured to convert to Islam by Muslim man; abandoned upon refusing conversion
Kozhikode, Kerala, India 
12 March, 2026
Case Summary
In the Kozhikode district of Kerala, a 21-year-old Hindu woman was lured into a relationship, pressured to convert to Islam by a Muslim man named .Shahul Hameed (27). He pressured to convert their minor child to Islam. According to reports, the accused, Shahul Hameed, was a native of Kakkadpoyil who came into contact with the victim, originally from Thrissur, while they were working together. The accused gradually lured her, following which the two became friends and later entered into a romantic relationship that culminated in marriage. The couple got married at the revered Guruvayoor Temple. After the marriage, they began living together, and the victim later gave birth to a child. According to the victim, the issue of religious conversion was never raised before the marriage. However, after the wedding, Shahul Hameed and his family began pressuring her to convert to Islam. Following the birth of the child, the pressure intensified, and the family insisted that both the victim and her minor child must convert to Islam if they wished to be accepted by the family. The victim further stated that Shahul Hameed and his relatives attempted to take her and the infant to Ponnani, a town in Malappuram district known locally as a centre associated with organised religious conversions. When the victim refused to convert, Shahul Hameed abandoned her and the child and fled. During this period, she also discovered that he had begun attempting to lure another woman from the Christian community into a similar relationship. Subsequently, the victim approached the police and filed a complaint. Acting on her complaint, the Tiruvambadi Police in Kozhikode registered a case against Shahul Hameed and took him into custody. As of the date of writing this report, the investigation was ongoing.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case is being added to the tracker under the primary category- Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes. The subcategory selected 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 other subcategory selected is- Brainwashed and/or Groomed. The tertiary category selected is- Conversion of minor. In our database, we have not added incidents where women have converted to another religion of their free will and no allegations of forced/involuntary conversion have been made. However, there are certain cases of conversion where the consent itself is a result of the brainwashing or grooming of a minor by the non-Hindu perpetrator trying to victimise a woman for her Hindu religious identity. The phenomenon of grooming points to non-Hindu perpetrators identifying their Hindu victims’ vulnerabilities and exploiting them over months and sometimes years, to extract the supposed ‘consent’ in order to convert their religion. In most cases of grooming, the victims are minors or the grooming started when the victim was a minor. In other cases of grooming, the non-Hindu perpetrator brainwashes and grooms a minor victim to extract their trust and then proceeds to rape them repeatedly with the intent of converting them to their faith. It is pertinent to understand here that when the victim is a minor, the ‘consent’ to convert or enter into a romantic relationship with an adult itself is redundant – addressed by POCSO. While every case of conversion of a minor and incidents of establishing a physical relationship with a minor by an adult is a crime, for the purpose of this database, a case would be considered a hate crime only if there is a distinct religious angle to the grooming. For example, in the UK, if a Hindu minor is targeted by Pakistani grooming gangs, it would be considered a hate crime because the victims are specifically targeted owing to their non-Muslim religious identity with the perpetrators being Muslim. In other cases, if a Hindu minor is brainwashed into entering a physical relationship with the non-Hindu adult perpetrator and the family alleges grooming/brainwashing of the minor to convert her religion, it would form a part of this database. If the victim is a Hindu adult, the case would form a part of this database only if the victim herself says that she was brainwashed/groomed to convert her religion. However, if the victim is deceased (murdered or otherwise), the case would form a part of this database if her family/friends provided testimony that the victim was brainwashed/groomed to convert her religion. Since these crimes have a distinct religious angle where the victim is being targeted owing to her Hindu religious identity, these cases are considered a hate crime. The other sub-category selected here is - Leaves Hindu partner upon refusal to convert. When Hindu women are in a relationship with non-Hindu men, there are cases where the woman faces pressure/threats/violence to convert and change her religious identity by the non-Hindu man. However, when the Hindu woman refuses to convert, the non-Hindu man ends the relationship or divorces the woman, as the case might be. 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 pressuring the Hindu woman to change her religious identity and upon her refusal, ends the relationship. Cases where the Hindu woman converts to Islam and does not file a complaint about the force, or threat after she refuses to convert to Islam, are not considered a part of the hate tracker. The second primary category selected here is - Predatory Proselytisation. Within it, the sub-category selected 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. Such cases where Hindu victims are harassed to convert to the perpetrator’s religion are rooted in animosity towards the victim’s religious identity and are therefore documented as religiously motivated hate crimes. The other sub-category selected here is - Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination, with tertiary category being - 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 21-year-old Hindu woman was drawn into a relationship and subsequently faced sustained pressure to convert to Islam from the Muslim accused, Shahul Hameed (27), after their marriage. Firstly, although the Muslim accused did not conceal his religious identity, the circumstances of the relationship indicate that the Hindu woman was led to believe that her faith would not become an obstacle after marriage. Trusting the stability of the relationship and the absence of any prior insistence on conversion, she married him. However, the situation changed after the wedding, when the accused and his family began pressuring her to convert to Islam. While the victim was an adult, the progression of events reflects a pattern where the expectation of conversion was introduced only after the marital bond had been secured. The targeting of a Hindu woman and the subsequent insistence that she abandon her faith indicate that the pressure for conversion was not incidental but central to the accused’s conduct, demonstrating a clear religious motive. Secondly, the accused and his family reportedly subjected the victim to emotional blackmail, telling her that both she and her child would only be accepted by the family if they converted to Islam. By linking familial acceptance and marital stability to religious conversion, the accused attempted to force the victim into abandoning her faith under emotional duress. Pressuring a Hindu individual to discard her religious faith and embrace another is a direct attack on her religious identity and dignity. It was not a matter of personal choice; it was coercion rooted in hostility towards the victim's Hindu identity. Such an attempt reflects religious animosity because the act was not simply about personal differences but about erasing the victim’s Hindu faith, making it a religiously motivated crime. Thirdly, the accused also wanted to convert the minor child as well. It is important to note here that the child 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. Since this case exemplifies the use of coercion and manipulation to achieve religious conversion, it is a blatant act of religious hate. Fourth, when the victim refused to convert despite the sustained pressure and emotional coercion, the accused abandoned both her and their infant child. This abandonment underscores the conditional nature of the relationship, where acceptance within the marriage and family structure was tied explicitly to religious conversion. By deserting the victim after she refused to relinquish her Hindu faith, the accused effectively reinforced that the continuation of the relationship was contingent upon her compliance with the demand to convert. Such conduct demonstrates that the pressure to convert was not incidental but a central objective, and the victim’s refusal resulted in her being discarded. This also demonstrates that the accused was never interested in a genuine relationship with a Hindu woman; instead, his only goal was religious conversion. 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 until they convert. 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: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incidents based on when an event occurred or when the victim's ordeal began. It is important to clarify that none of the media sources covering this case has specified the exact date when the victim came into contact with the accused. Therefore, for documentation purposes, we have recorded the date based on when the incident was reported in the media, 13 March 2026.
Victim Details
Total Victim
2
Deceased
0
Gender
- Male 0
- Female 1
- Third Gender 0
- Unknown 1
Caste
- SC/ST 0
- OBC 0
- General 0
- Unknown 2
Age Group
- Minor 1
- Adult 0
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 1
Case Status
Arrested
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
