Kashmiri woman’s statement to court belies Sirsa’s forced-conversion narrative, reveals complex story

A statement to a magistrate by an 18-year-old woman at the centre of a religious conversion row in Kashmir discloses new details about her conversion, her relationship with 29-year-old Shahid Nazir Bhat and her relationship with her family. According to the statement, recorded on 26 June and accessed by The Caravan, the 18-year-old converted from Sikhism to Islam in 2020, at the age of 16 or 17. She has been in a five-year-long relationship with Bhat, since she was 13 years old. Bhat confirmed the relationship but denied having sexual relations with her when she was a minor. The statement is silent on this aspect, so the details remain uncertain. However, the 18-year-old states that she seeks to “resume their matrimonial ties and stay together” with Bhat. She also accuses her family of beating, torturing and threatening to kill her. Within days of being returned to her family, the 18-year-old had been married off to a Sikh man—her statement suggests that she was forced into it against her wishes.

The 18-year-old married Bhat on 5 June 2021, their nikah documents showed. Bhat was subsequently arrested on a complaint filed by the 18-year-old’s father, dated 21 June, accusing him of kidnapping her. The woman’s statement, however, called it a “false and fabricated” case and sought his release from custody. She stated she went away with Bhat on “her own free will.” In contrast, the 18-year-old woman raised grave allegations against her family in her statement. “The deponent has been time and again beaten tortured by her family who are against her reversion and marriage,” the 18-year-old said. “Deponent does not want to go to her parental home because she has threat of being killed by her family & the Sikh Community (Local).”

The 18-year-old’s statement was recorded before a magistrate under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as part of the investigation into her family’s complaint against Bhat. Statements under Section 164 are admissible as evidence, unlike statements to the police, and are therefore normally recorded by a magistrate in private to ensure that it is given freely, without fear or coercion. The 18-year-old’s statement reveals a complex situation—in which she entered into a relationship with Bhat as a young girl, converted to Islam as a minor, married him as an adult and left her family home as an adult. The statement is also unequivocal in stating that she now wishes to remain married and stay with Bhat, and that she did not wish to live in her parental home out of fear for her life.

Bhat was released from jail on 3 July and spoke to us on call on 8 July.  He corroborated most of the assertions by the 18-year-old in the 164 statement. He denied allegations that he had kidnapped the 18-year-old at gunpoint or forcibly converted her. “Those things are lies,” he said. “She was very excited to be a Muslim and wanted to have a nikah with me.”

The 18-year-old’s conversion became a topic of political debate on 27 June, after Manjinder Singh Sirsa, the Shiromani Akali Dal leader who heads the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee, led a protest in Srinagar about the forced conversion of Kashmiri Sikh women. Sirsa claimed that on 26 June, the 18-year-old and another Kashmiri Sikh woman had been “kidnapped at gunpoint and had a nikah, that too with a 50-year-old man.” He called this “love jihad”—a right-wing conspiracy theory that claims Muslim men lure women from other religions into marriages to convert their religion. “Why are these maulanas and muftis silent?” Sirsa said. “Didn’t they have any shame while reading a nikah like this? Of young girls with elder men who have ten-ten children?” A senior police officer with knowledge of details of the 18-year-old’s case told us that the claim that she was kidnapped on gunpoint was “ridiculous.” The officer said, “People try to get political mileage, and tried to give it a different colour.”

In the following week, politicians portrayed forced religious conversions of Sikh women in Kashmir as a matter that required urgent attention, bringing massive media attention to the 18-year-old. On 28 June, Sirsa said that Amit Shah, the home minister, assured him “about the safety of the minority girls in the Valley and that the girls would soon be returned to their families.” A video of Ravinder Raina, the president of BJP’s Jammu and Kashmir unit, circulated on the internet in which he claimed that a “conspiracy” was afoot to “oust Sikhs” from Kashmir. In June and July, law-enforcement agencies in Uttar Pradesh arrested two men accusing them of running a racket of forced conversions and another man for forcibly changing the religion of a woman. All three men were Muslim.

Amid the many allegations of forced conversions in the news, the 18-year-old’s account remained missing. Her statement to the judicial officer, accessed by The Caravan, gave her narrative about the events leading up to Sirsa’s protest. The statement did not characterise her case as a religious issue or mention anything about being abducted, forcibly converted or married. Her 26 June statement said, “Deponent is a major being above 18 years and has right to decide herself.” Yet, it also raised questions about her five-year-long relationship with Bhat, who would be liable for serious criminal offences if he engaged in sexual relations with her as a minor. We could not establish contact with the woman for comments on Sirsa’s narrative, the events that followed his protest, or the nature of her relationship with Bhat.

*

The 18-year-old is a resident of the Rainawari area, in Srinagar. Her Aadhaar card and tenth-standard certificate state that she was born on 10 February 2003. In her statement to the magistrate, the 18-year-old said that she changed her religion to Islam in 2020—she does not mention the exact date, so it is unclear whether she was 16 or 17 years old at the time. Nasir ul Islam, the mufti of Srinagar, said that anyone changing their religion to Islam should be 18 years old. When we asked whether a 17-year-old girl’s conversion would be considered illegal under shariat, he said, “It’s not illegal, but we don’t consider it valid. We only entertain such requests when they are 18.” He said, “But if a person converts their religion at 17 and at 18 remains with the conversion, then the conversion is valid.”

Bhat worked as a driver. He is a divorcee with a six-year-old daughter. According to Bhat, he first met the 18-year-old on 10 July 2016 in Rainawari, where they both lived. When we asked him if he thought there was something wrong with being in a relationship with a 13-year-old, he said, “She was willing. I never did anything illegal.” When specifically asked if he had sexual relations with her when she was a minor, he said, “That was not the case.” Sexual relations between an adult and a minor are criminal under Indian law. 

Bhat characterised their relationship as a public affair. He said he had an independent relationship with her parents, but refused to share details about it. Bhat said he frequented their house often. He added that in 2019, he went with the family to Mumbai for some health treatment that the 18-year-old needed. According to him, her mother definitely knew about the relationship. Nazir, Bhat’s 65-year-old father, said that six months ago, he heard that Bhat was roaming around with the 18-year-old in an abaya. After that, Nazir said, he told the 18-year-old’s family that “my son has divorced his wife. Don’t allow him into your home … Aap ka bhi badnami hoga”—it will bring disrepute to you also. He also said the 18-year-old’s father used to visit Bhat’s house. Calls and messages to the 18-year-old’s father and his lawyer went unanswered.

According to Bhat, he did not ask the 18-year-old to convert to Islam. “I never asked her to change her religion. She did it on her own,” he said. Bhat said she also changed her name and wanted to have a nikah with him. The nikahnama—the contract of marriage in Islam—stated that Bhat and the 18-year-old were married under Islamic law on 5 June. The 18-year-old’s statement before the court of Bazila Bashir, a city munsiff—a judicial magistrate—on 26 June mentioned that it was originally given in Urdu and had been translated to English.

The statement mentioned that the 18-year-old left her parents’ home in Rainawari on 21 June and tried to contact Bhat, but his number was switched off. Then, “around 4 in the morning deponent went to Rainawari Hospital where she stayed till morning and contacted the accused again through a cellphone of a doctor. Later the accused came to Rainawari hospital.” According to Nazir, on 21 June, Bhat “was sleeping till 7 am and his phone was off. Once he switched on his phone and he received a call from someone. Without even washing his face, he left.”

The 18-year-old’s statement said that she “told the accused that she was beaten by family at parental home and she wants to go with accused, if not she will commit suicide. On hearing this, the accused took deponent to Gulmarg in a Sumo. Both deponent and accused stayed in Gulmarg for 3–4 days.” According to the statement, the 18-year-old said that her mother had called Bhat, and threatened him that her family would register a case against him if he did not bring her back home. The statement mentioned that it was due to this call that they surrendered to the police on 25 June. 

The 18-year-old’s statement emphasised that she “had gone out with accused out of her own free will.” Bhat corroborated the 18-year-old’s version of events but said that they spent two nights in Gulmarg.

But, according to a report that the Rainawari Police prepared about the case, the 18-year-old’s father filed a complaint against Bhat on 21 June accusing him of abducting his daughter. The report, dated 29 June, was signed by Rakesh Pandita, the station-house officer. It mentioned that according to the complaint, Bhat and two of his friends went to the 18-year-old’s room on the night intervening 20 June and 21 June “and forcibly took her away by giving life threats to her and her family members.” That same day, the police registered a first-information report under sections 506 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code, that pertain to criminal intimidation, and kidnapping or inducing a woman to compel her marriage.

During the police’s effort to locate the 18-year-old, Nazir said the police kept him in a lock-up between 21 June and 25 June as well, along with some other relatives and family members. “We told them we do not know anything,” he said. “They abused us, threatened us.” Nazir told us that his six-year-old daughter was also called to the police station on at least two days. When we asked Bhat about this, he said, “That’s my bad luck. It’s their job.” He added, “I will say that the police didn’t pressure me, persecute me at all.”

Nazir said he was released after Bhat and the 18-year-old surrendered. Bhat was formally arrested the same day. “The missing girl was also not ready to go back to her parental home and totally refused to go with her parents,” the police report said. The report mentioned that the 18-year-old also gave a statement to the police under section 161 of the CrPC, which mentioned that “she converted into Islam from Sikhism one year before, in 2020, and has married Shahid, as per Islamic law.” The report mentioned that the 18-year-old had changed her name after conversion. According to the senior police officer, the 18-year-old was kept in the women’s police station till the next day. In the woman’s police station, at least “three women cops were deployed for her protection and guard her so that she doesn’t harm herself. She was disturbed.”

According to the 18-year-old’s statement to the court, at the police station, the SHO “forced deponent to return deponent to her parental home else the police will ensure that PSA is levelled against the accused.” PSA refers to the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act of 1978. “But the deponent did not fall for the black mailing and wanted to appear before the court for her statement.”

The 18-year-old’s statement to the magistrate reiterated that she did not want to go to her parents’ home. But the day it was recorded, she had to go with her parents. A relative of Bhat, who spoke to us on the condition of anonymity, said he was present at the court that day. “At around 10:30 pm, the SHO entered the court premises in a jeep,” the relative said. “They took her away and her family forcibly snatched her from the police. She resisted going, but she was dragged and her family members and relatives tore her veil,” the relative said.

There has been no statement from the 18-year-old about her subsequent marriage to a Sikh man on 29 June. Paramjit Singh Sarna, a SAD leader and a former DSGMC president, told the press that “there was no coercion or force used.” Sarna said, “Though it has been claimed otherwise, there was no previous marriage and the girl was married only today.” When we asked Sarna about the case, he said, “Our girl is back in our own community, and that was my only concern.”

The police report said that the court ordered Bhat’s release after the 18-year-old’s statement was recorded, which mentioned their marriage. “Keeping in view the present security scenario and life threats to the accused and breach in communal harmony, accused was kept in the custody,” the report mentioned. Bhat was released on 3 July. He told us that he would accept her second marriage if she told him she was happy in it and wished to give him a divorce. 

The senior police officer who knew about the case said, “It’s a fact that when these type of incidents happen, minorities here feel insecure.” He said that the police tried to “avoid the communal overturn between the two religions.” But “people from outside had vested interests to disrupt the peace here.” Assembly elections are to be held in Punjab and Uttar Pradesh next year. The DSGMC—which Sirsa heads—was to go to polls in April 2021, but the elections were postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On 29 June, Sirsa posted images of himself paying obeisance at the Bangla Sahib Gurdwara in Delhi with the newly married couple. Four days later, Sirsa tweeted that the DSGMC had provided jobs and accommodation to them.

Several statements by Sirsa about alleged forced conversions appear unfounded. In an earlier tweet about the 18-year-old, Sirsa also said she was “mentally disturbed”—he has so far not substantiated this claim. Bhat said, “If that was true, is there a certificate for her illness?” At one point of time during his protest, Sirsa had said that “our four daughters, in the past one month, have on gunpoint been abducted and converted.” He named one more girl, Danmeet, who was “still missing.”

Four days later, Al Jazeera reported that 29-year-old Danmeet told the publication that she converted her religion to Islam in 2012 and married her classmate 30-year-old Muzafar Shaban in 2014. “It was the wish of both of us, no one forced me. It was my decision because the Indian constitution grants me this right to choose my partner,” Danmeet said. The report mentioned that Danmeet said she left home on 6 June to live with Muzafar Shaban “telling her family not to look for her as she was now going to live with her husband. But her family went to the police and the couple was traced within two hours, she said. Shaban was arrested on kidnapping charges and Danmeet handed over to her parents.”

The report added that Danmeet was taken to Punjab where multiple groups tried to force her into giving a statement against her husband. “After her return from Punjab, Danmeet was presented to a local court on June 26 where she gave a statement saying her family had falsely charged her husband with kidnapping and she should be provided police protection,” the report said. However, her husband was still in jail, according to the report. It mentioned that Danmeet told the court, “I just want to live with my in-laws and did not want to go back to my parents.” When we called Rayees Ahmad, the SHO of the Saddar police station in Baghat area, about the case, he said he is busy. We messaged him a questionnaire, but he did not respond. We also emailed the Jammu and Kashmir police about the case but did not receive a response.

Since the media frenzy around allegations of forced conversions began, another woman’s name has featured in the news. On 1 July, Aaj Tak reported, “The second girl, Virah Pal Kaur, is 26 years old. She has still not returned home.” According to a writ petition she filed in the Jammu and Kashmir High Court on 8 May, she had adopted Islam and changed her name to Khadija. The petition said she married her 31-year-old husband, Manzoor, earlier this year. The couple sought protection from her parents and the police through the petition. On 20 May, the court granted them protection. “In order to ensure protection to the life of the petitioners … it has become necessary … to ensure that the petitioners are not harassed/attacked/kidnapped or caused any harm by respondents 6 and 7”—Khadija’s parents—“or by anyone at their instance.”

But politicians appear to be disregarding the women’s accounts while talking about the matter of forced conversions of Sikh women in Kashmir. After Sirsa’s protest, a video of Ravinder, the president of BJP’s Jammu and Kashmir unit, circulated on the internet where he can be seen repeating Sirsa’s statements and making claims without substantiating them. “When a Sikh walks in Kashmir, it means India’s national flag is walking. This conspiracy is not against the Sikhs but against the entire Hindustan,” Ravinder said in the video. “After the ouster of pundits in 1990, now a conspiracy is going on to oust the Sikhs, who are peace-loving and want to maintain brotherhood, from the Valley.”

During his protest, Sirsa had asked the centre to “implement laws like the ones in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh for inter-religion marriages, where you need the consent of parents and courts.” On 4 July, RP Singh, a BJP leader, tweeted that a delegation of Sikhs from the All Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee met him, raising several demands for the community in Kashmir. These demands also included bringing in a law to prevent forced conversions in view of the “rising forced religious conversion of minority community in the valley.” It did not mention any data support this assertion. Shah, the home minister, also met a delegation of the same committee the same day.

Sirsa has received backlash for his comments as well. A man named Nasir Khuehami has filed complaints against Sirsa in two police stations in Jammu and Kashmir for his statements that are “bound to generate communal disharmony. ” The police stations reportedly refused to file an FIR and a chief judicial magistrate has since asked for a status report from SHO Sadder police station about this by 12 July. Jagmohan Singh Raina, a lawyer in Srinagar who heads the All Party Sikh Coordination Committee, said, “We highly condemn the assertions like ‘love jihad’ made by Sirsa and I request them that we do not need outsiders to solve such cases.” A note released by Raina on 30 June said, “The Sikh community in Jammu and Kashmir has been living in harmony with the majority Muslim community. Over the years many attempts were made to create a wedge between the two communities by the vested interests. However the nefarious designs got defeated due to the strong bond that exists between the two communities.”

Raina said that he had one issue with such cases: “When our daughters approached these maulvis for a religious conversion, why don’t they ask for the girls’ parents?” His note mentioned, “I on the behalf of Sikh community would request that the Inter Caste Marriage Act is implemented in Jammu and Kashmir.” Sikhism does not prescribe casteism. The note further said, “It is important that an Anti-Conversion Law is implemented in Jammu and Kashmir.”

Pandita, the SHO of Rainawari police station, said he was not free to talk about the 18-year-old’s alleged forced conversion. Vijay Kumar, the inspector general of police of Kashmir, asked us to speak to Sandeep Choudhary, a senior superintendent of police. Choudhary did not respond to messages about the case either. Emails to the Jammu and Kashmir police about the 18-year-old case went unanswered.

Correction: An earlier version of this piece did not identify Nazir. He is Bhat’s 65-year-old father. The Caravan regrets the error.