Hindu woman lured, converted to Islam, and forced into nikah by married Muslim man

Case ID : e274dc0 | Location : Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Sun, 20 July, 2025

Case ID : e274dc0

Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh, India

20 July, 2025

Hindu woman lured, converted to Islam, and forced into nikah by married Muslim man

Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes

Forced conversion before marriage

Forced to do Nikah

Case Summary

In Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh, a Hindu woman was lured into a relationship by a Muslim man named Tariq Mansuri under the pretence of business employment. The victim was converted to Islam and renamed. Her husband had initially arranged her job at Tariq’s garment shop in Kiratpur, after which Tariq gradually gained her trust. As she began accompanying him to wholesale markets in Delhi and Saharanpur, tensions grew in her marriage, leading to separation. Tariq then rented a separate house for her and initiated a physical relationship, despite being married himself. Later, three Muslim clerics forcibly converted the woman to Islam, renamed her Ayesha, and solemnised a Nikah with Tariq. She was made to run his shop and live under the identity imposed upon her. Soon after, she was taken to Delhi, where doctors examined her for a supposed operation to prevent childbirth. Upon refusal, she discovered that Tariq had negotiated the sale of her kidney for Rs 90 lakh. She pretended to be unwell to avoid the operation. On 21 July 2025, she was taken again, this time to Rishikesh, where Tariq and his accomplices attempted to poison her in Tisotre village so her kidney could be removed without consent. She managed to inform her father and brothers by phone, who then alerted the police. The gang’s plan was foiled, and an FIR was lodged on 23 July 2025 at Bijnor Kotwali police station. Police arrested five accused: Tariq, his wife Nasreen, and associates Nadeem, Ayaan, and Aman. SP (City) Dr Sanjeev Bajpai confirmed the registration of a case against ten individuals. The remaining accused and buyers involved in the kidney racket were being pursued.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The primary category in this case is: Crimes against women in relationships and other sexual crimes. The secondary category under this is: Forced conversion before marriage. The tertiary category under this is: Forced to do Nikah. 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 case concerning the Hindu woman from Bijnor fits squarely within the framework of a religiously motivated hate crime directed against Hindus, specifically situated within the continuum of coerced conversions and assaults upon religious identity. The sequence of events, wherein a Muslim man assumed a position of personal and professional influence over a Hindu woman, gradually disengaged her from her familial structure, and ultimately compelled her to relinquish her Hindu identity, exemplifies an orchestrated act of ideological aggression. The gradual initiation of sexual relations under deceitful premises and the subsequent religious conversion under pressure reflect a pattern not of isolated misconduct but of systemic targeting. This is not a matter of mere interpersonal exploitation; it is the forced imposition of a religious identity upon a Hindu woman through deception, confinement, coercion, and threats to bodily integrity. The conversion was not incidental but a prerequisite for the Islamic marital procedure, the Nikah, enforced upon her by clerics, which in turn was facilitated by her captors. The woman was made to abandon her inherited religion, rechristened under Islamic nomenclature, and integrated into a fabricated Muslim identity. This act bears the hallmark of a conscious obliteration of her Hindu selfhood. Furthermore, the subsequent attempt to commodify her body through a planned organ sale, under threat of poisoning, compounds the religious hostility with a clear physical threat, a form of violence that was initiated once the victim had already been rendered vulnerable through religious disenfranchisement. It is critical to situate this within the broader pattern wherein Hindu women are systematically drawn into exploitative relationships by non-Hindu men. Such acts, when executed under religious pretext and with deliberate rejection of the Hindu identity of the victim, constitute a grave form of religious animosity. In such cases, the intent is not merely personal control, but the erasure of the Hindu character of the individual, using coercive and humiliating means. Consequently, this incident warrants its classification not as an ordinary crime, but as a targeted hate crime against Hindus. Disclaimer: It is important to clarify that none of the media sources covering this case have specified the exact date when the victim's ordeal began. The earliest date mentioned is July 21, 2025, when she was threatened and taken to Rishikesh. Since Hinduphobia Tracker records the incident based on when the victim’s ordeal began and not when it was reported, we have considered the date of the incident as July 21, 2025, though the media reported the incident on July 28, 2025.