Hadiya case: No court can annul marriage between two consenting adults, says SC

coastaldigest.com news network
February 22, 2018

The Supreme Court of India on Thursday, Feb 22, observed that no court can annul marriages between two consenting adults or resort to a “roving enquiry” on whether the married relationship between a man and woman is based on consent.

The Bench led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra defined the limits of the court's jurisdiction in Hadiya case.

“Can a court say a marriage is not genuine or whether the relationship is not genuine? Can a court say she [Hadiya] did not marry the right person? She came to us and told us that she married of her own accord,” Justice D.Y. Chandrachud observed.

Ms. Hadiya, the 26-year-old Homeopathy student converted to Islam and subsequently married a Muslim man. The marriage was annulled by the Kerala High Court, which said it was “sham”. Her father, Asokan K.M., alleged that she was indoctrinated by a “well-oiled network” who is a front to recruit Indian citizens and traffick them abroad to strife-prone countries like Syria to work as “sex slaves”. However, Hadiya has repeatedly stated that her father had been telling blatant lies to separate her from her husband.

“She said on the telephone to her father that she wants to go to Syria to rear sheep. There may be fathers who receive such news with calm and fortitude, but this father was alarmed,” senior advocate Shyam Divan, for Mr. Asokan, addressed the Bench. Mr. Divan said his daughter is a victim of an “enormous trafficking exercise”.

Justice Chandrachud countered that if there was trafficking of citizens involved, the government had the power to stop it on the basis of credible information. If citizens are travelling abroad to be part of a manifest illegality, then too, the government has the authority to stop them.

“But in personal law, we cannot annul marriages because she did not marry the right person,” Justice Chandrachud told to Mr. Divan.

Chief Justice Misra said Ms. Hadiya's father may still view her as a child who was enticed or attracted by some kind of extraordinary situation. “But she is an adult,” Chief Justice Misra pointed out.

Chief Justice Misra said “What troubles us is there is a roving enquiry on the marriage of two consenting adults to find out whether was consent.”

The National Investigating Agency (NIA) had been probing the case and what they claim to be several other similar cases of “brainwashing”, radicalisation and indoctrination in Kerala. In the previous hearing, the court had told the NIA to stay away from prying into Ms. Hadiya's choice to marry Shafin Jahan.

But Mr. Divan said the Kerala High Court was “absolutely justified” in annulling the marriage, considering the particular circumstances of the case and the material before it that there was a network involved behind the conversion and marriage of Ms. Hadiya.

Countering Chief Justice Misra's observation that courts cannot intervene in a marriage between adults, Mr. Divan classified Ms. Hadiya as a “vulnerable adult” who still needs protection.

“This is a case exactly in which marriage is being used as a device to keep her [Hadiya] outside the reaches of the court,” Mr. Divan submitted.

In an intervention, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, for Mr. Shafin Jahan, said Mr. Divan was being “unfair” to the court. Mr. Sibal denied that Ms. Hadiya said she wanted to go to Syria for sheep farming. Instead, it was her father, upset by her conversion to Islam and subsequent marriage, who told her that she would be trafficked to terrorist countries. The court scheduled the next hearing on March 8.

Comments

Based on SC ruling  on Wrong judgement for simple cases  by the High court shows incompetency of the judges.

The marriage of 2consented parties can not be annulled by the court, even if it is wrong religiously, still they have access to have court marriages.

Very pity High court judges commit simple mistakes. A layman would never do such errors.

 

Based on SC ruling  on Wrong judgement for simple cases  by the High court shows incompetency of the judges.

The marriage of 2consented parties can not be annulled by the court, even if it is wrong religiously, still they have access to have court marriages.

Very pity High court judges commit simple mistakes. A layman would never do such errors.

 

 

Mohammed
 - 
Thursday, 22 Feb 2018

They need life.. they need justice

Suresh Kalladka
 - 
Thursday, 22 Feb 2018

Her father is an insane i think. Father making all issues with help of some saffrons

Sandesh
 - 
Thursday, 22 Feb 2018

Why they didnt reveal they got married.. They covered that in court.. 

Mohan
 - 
Thursday, 22 Feb 2018

Court wasted much money and time for this. Let them live freely. They are not minor. They can take decisions

Rizwan
 - 
Thursday, 22 Feb 2018

Truth will prevail, and falsehood will perish.

Kumar
 - 
Thursday, 22 Feb 2018

Thank God.. SC stands for justice. 

Ganesh
 - 
Thursday, 22 Feb 2018

Media, Saffrons and SDPI people made Hadiya case worst. They dragged this to court, NIA.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 11,2020

Dubai, Feb 11: An Indian national has been diagnosed with the novel coronavirus in the UAE, bringing the total number of confirmed infection cases to eight, the country's health ministry has said.

The death toll in China's coronavirus outbreak has gone up to 1,016 while the confirmed cases of infection have soared to 42,638, Chinese health officials said on Tuesday.

The UAE Ministry of Health and Prevention (MoHAP) said on Monday that the Indian national was infected after he interacted with a recently diagnosed person.

"The Ministry of Health and Prevention announced today the eighth confirmed case of new coronavirus in the UAE, which is an Indian national who had interacted with a recently diagnosed person," it said in a tweet.

On Sunday, the ministry said that the two new patients, a Chinese national and a Filipino, had been diagnosed with the disease and were receiving medical care as per the highest health standards available in the country.

It said that all health facilities will continue to report any new cases suspected to have coronavirus.

Last week, a family of four who arrived from Wuhan for a holiday in Dubai were diagnosed with coronavirus. A fifth patient, who also arrived from the Chinese city, was confirmed to have been infected with 
the virus, but is reportedly in a stable condition.

China and countries around the world are scrambling to contain the spread of coronavirus which fiirst surfaced in Wuhan city in the Central Hubei province of China. Apart from China, two deaths have occurred in Hong Kong and the Philippines.

Besides Germany, Britain and Italy, other European nations with cases of the virus include France, Russia, Belgium, Sweden, Finland and Spain.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 7,2020

Thrissur, Mar 7: A local temple in Kerala is at the centre of a social media storm after the picture of a ''Brahmins-only toilet'' outside its main campus went viral on online platforms, prompting the management to remove the signboard.

The picture of three toilets, with signboards showing "Men", "Women" and "Brahmins", at the Kuttumukku Mahadeva Temple in Thrissur, has gone viral with many social media users viewing it as an unethical practise that can portray the progressive state in a bad light.

However, temple officials said the toilets were located outside the main campus and the board was brought to their notice only now.

Kannan, an official of the temple committee, said the board was placed nearly two decades ago and nobody raised any complaint against it so far.

"That particular toilet was being used by priests and other temple employees. We didn't even notice that board... As soon as we came to know about it, we removed it and affixed a staff-only board," he told PTI.

Also a CPI-M functionary and ward councillor, Kannan said the shrine and it's management was against all kinds of unethical customs.

The temple official said they were planning to pursue legal measures against the man who posted the photo of the toilets on social media.

"We suspect that he did it deliberately to create issues during the time of the festival and to tarnish the shrine's reputation. Not only that, the photo he shared was an old one though he claimed that it was taken during the time of the festival, " he said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
February 14,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.