Hindu students subtly groomed and indoctrinated: Muslim school principal brainwashes nursery children with Islamic religious references in school textbooks
Raisen, Madhya Pradesh, India 
7 August, 2025
Case Summary
In Raisen, Madhya Pradesh, minor Hindu students at Baby Convent School were subjected to subtle grooming and religious indoctrination by their Muslim principal. Reports reveal that nursery students were taught Hindi phonetics such as “Ka for Kaaba” (the Islamic holy site), “Ma for Masjid” (mosque), “Na for Namaz” (Islamic prayer), and “Au for aurat” (woman shown in hijab) instead of the traditional “Ka se Kabutar” (pigeon) and “Ma se Machhli” (fish). The matter surfaced when a student’s uncle noticed the altered references in a textbook and alerted the Hindu organisation Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP). Parents and members of Hindu organisations protested at the school, demanding the cancellation of the school's license. Tensions escalated when the principal of the school, EA Qureshi, defended the wrongdoing by claiming, “M can also be taught from Mandir (temple) as well as Masjid,” further angering the protesters. Following the uproar, Qureshi went on to defend himself, claiming it was an oversight. He said that the “Patti Pahada” book set was ordered from Bhopal and used for only one student, and that there was no intention to hurt sentiments. ABVP’s district convener, Ashwini Patel, asserted that such material misleads children and erodes Hindu traditions, demanding the older format be restored. Protesters contacted the District Education Officer (DEO) seeking cancellation of the school’s recognition. Police urged them to submit formal complaints. The DEO confirmed the material would be seized and investigated, and that a recommendation for the school’s recognition to be revoked would be sent to the Joint Director.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of - Predatory Proselytisation. Within it. the sub-category selected is - Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination, with the tertiary category being - Pattern of targeting Hindus 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 minor Hindu students were being subtly indoctrinated and groomed by the Muslim school principal. The deliberate use of books containing religiously loaded Islamic terms such as Kaaba, Masjid, Namaz in place of culturally neutral and widely accepted Hindi vocabulary was not an educational necessity but a method of exposing minor Hindu students to Islam and Islamic culture at a young age. It is important to note here that the school is a religiously neutral and secular place where the focus should be on education rather than indoctrination, as it comprises students from different religious backgrounds. In this case, however, the Muslim principal used the school as a platform for promoting and imposing Islamic cultural norms on Hindu children. This amounts to a subtle indoctrination and grooming attempt targeting minors. The intention was essentially to expose minor Hindu students to Islam and build familiarity, normalcy, and comfort with Islamic symbols and practices, thereby making their future conversion easier. Such actions are rooted in religious animosity towards Hinduism and the Hindu community and fit into the broader framework of predatory proselytisation. The perpetrator was aware that the students were minors, which means they were incapable of understanding or providing informed consent to such subtle conversion and indoctrination attempts. It is a well-established fact that children are more susceptible to manipulation since they are still developing emotionally, cognitively, and socially. Their brains are not fully mature, making them more vulnerable. This case demonstrates a calculated strategy of targeting those who are less able to resist or understand the long-term implications of conversion, making it a significant case of religiously motivated hate crime. 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 minors without their volition. The use of grooming, where trust is built only to exploit, is an insidious method that exploits the child’s naivety and dependence. After the backlash, the Muslim principal claimed that “M can also be taught from Mandir (temple) and M can also be taught from Masjid,” which was essentially an act of self-defence after being caught red-handed. He deliberately used the Mandir reference as a red herring, since the protesters questioned why culturally neutral words were not used at all. Protesters never raised any issue regarding the Mandir. He also claimed that it was an oversight, which is highly unlikely, given that every textbook undergoes strict review before being allotted to students, making such a significant error improbable and indicating deliberate malicious intent. Disclaimer: It is important to clarify that the report does not specify the exact date when such books were published or when they were being taught in class. Therefore, for documentation purposes, we have recorded the date based on when the ABVP workers and parents arrived at the school to protest.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
