[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The apex court to hear on October 9 a plea challenging former Chief Justice JS Khehar’s order of a NIA probe in the case
The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, agreed to examine whether the Kerala High Court overstepped its judicial powers by annulling the marriage of Hadiya alias Akhila Ashokan with Shafin Jahan in what has come to be known popularly as the Kerala love jihad case.
A three-judge bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra also observed that Hadiya’s father, KM Ashokan, could not claim custody to her as she is a “24-year-old adult”. The bench said: “Either we will appoint loco parentis or we will send her somewhere safe. Father can’t insist on her custody”.
The bench was hearing a plea filed by Hadiya’s husband, Shafin Jahan in which he has challenged the Kerala High Court’s order that nullified his marriage.
The court also witnessed dramatic arguments put forth by Jahan’s counsel, senior advocate Dushyant Dave, who challenged an earlier order in the case – given by then Chief Justice JS Khehar – of an investigation conducted by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to ascertain the veracity of claims that the marriage of Hadiya to Shafin Jahan was not an “isolated incident” but part of a “pattern” of forceful conversion of girls to Islam by way of marriage. The NIA has also been tasked by the apex court to look into the seemingly outrageous and bizarre claims that Hadiya’s marriage was actually part of a radicalization scheme linked with global terror outfit, Islamic State.
On Tuesday, Dave challenged the court’s earlier order of an NIA probe in the case, asserting that “it struck at the very foundation of this multi-religious society” and was “sending terrible signals across the world”.
The apex court’s order of an NIA probe into a case of inter-faith marriage and alleged forced conversion has drawn wide-scale criticism from various legal luminaries and human rights groups.
Dave even asked the court: “two of the seniormost leaders in the BJP are married to members from minority community. Will your lordships order NIA enquiry against them”.
The senior advocate’s charged arguments drew a reprimand from the Bench, with Justice AM Khanwilkar telling Dave: “you are so loud that we can’t hear you”. However, this did not stop the counsel from carrying on with his vociferous arguments.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Tushar Mehta, who appeared in the court in place of ASG Maninder Singh who usually represents the NIA, told the court that the objections being raised by Dave had already been raised by senior advocate Kapil Sibal who was representing Jahan earlier. ASG Mehta said that the order by former CJI JS Khehar of an NIA probe in the case had been given after considering arguments placed by Sibal as well as the NIA.
Giving time to the NIA to properly respond to the charges made by advocate Dave, the Bench noted that it would hear the matter on October 9.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1507036719308{padding-top: 5px !important;padding-right: 5px !important;padding-bottom: 5px !important;padding-left: 5px !important;background-color: #c4c4c4 !important;border-radius: 5px !important;}”]Background to the Kerala Love Jihad case:
In May this year, the Kerala High Court had declared as “null and void” the marriage of 24-year-old Hindu woman – Hadiya alias Akhila – who had converted to Islam to marry a Muslim man – Shafin Jahan – in December 2016, terming the union as “sham”. It had ordered Hadiya to be placed in her parents’ protective custody.
Akhila was a homeopathy student in Kerala when she converted to Islam. Shafin Jahan had met her with his family in August 2016 in response to her posting on a marriage website and they got married last December.
Jahan, 27, challenged the Kerala High Court order in the Supreme Court, saying that the order was an “an insult to the independence of women in India”. He had requested the Supreme Court to order Hadiya’s father to produce her in court while claiming that she had converted to Islam of her own volition two years prior to their marriage.
Hadiya’s father, however, had said that she was a “helpless victim” trapped by a “well-oiled racket” which used “psychological measures” to indoctrinate people and convert them to Islam. He had also alleged that Jahan is a criminal and that Hadiya had been trapped by a network with connections to the Islamic State.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]