Hadiya marriage: Kerala govt rubbishes NIA’s shocking claims

coastaldigest.com news network
October 7, 2017

Kasaragod, Oct 7: The Kerala state government has  Kerala rejected the claims made by the Centre's National Investigation Agency (NIA) in the Supreme Court that the Hadiya case, involving conversion of a Hindu woman to Islam and her marriage to a Muslim man, is part of a “pattern” of religious conversions and radicalisation happening in the southern State.

In fact, Pinarayi Vijayan-led CPI (M) government said the Kerala Police was doing an “efficient” job investigating the Hadiya case until the Supreme Court intervened and, believing the NIA’s claims, transferred the investigation to the central agency.

In an affidavit filed in the Supreme Court, the Kerala government said the investigation conducted by the State Police had not revealed any offences which warranted an NIA probe.

"The investigation conducted so far by the Kerala Police has not revealed any incident relating to the commission of any scheduled offences to make a report to the Central Government under Section 6 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008," the affidavit filed by Subrata Biswas, the State's Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, said under oath to the Supreme Court.

The State questioned the sudden transfer of the case to the NIA, saying the State Police Chief had already entrusted the investigation to the Additional Director General of Police (Crimes) and directed to constitute a Special Investigation Team.

A comprehensive probe was already on into various aspects, including the conversion of the woman to Islam, the religious institutions and persons involved, the persons she was in contact, the family background and criminal antecedents of the man she married to, Shafin Jahan, the financial arrangements and other details of their alleged marriage, and finally, if the case involved any attempts of trafficking Hadiya to outside the country.

"The Kerala Police had conducted a thorough investigation in an efficient manner. The Kerala Police is competent to conduct the investigation in such crimes and would have reported to the Central government if any scheduled offences were found to have been committed as per the provisions under the NIA Act," the affidavit said.

On August 16, when the case was transferred to the NIA, then Chief Justice of India J.S. Khehar made a blunt remark to the Kerala government counsel that "we think you (Kerala Police) may take sides. So we asked the NIA for their inputs’’.

The court had wanted the NIA to give inputs after going through the files of the Hadiya case. Additional Solicitor General Maninder Singh, for NIA, had then returned to submit to the court that the Hadiya case was "not an isolated case and we have come across another case with a similar pattern and involving the same people who are acting as instigators".

However, the Supreme Court Bench on October 3, this time led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, had done a virtual U-turn by questioning the August 16 order for NIA probe.

The Bench led by Chief Justice Misra also prima facie found that the Kerala High Court had no authority to annul the inter-religious marriage between Jahan and Hadiya.

“The order for NIA investigation strikes at the very foundation of multi-religious society... Two senior BJP functionaries have married members of minority communities,” senior advocate Dushyant Dave and advocate Haris Beeran, for Jahan, had argued.

The apex court had further questioned the legality of girl's father keeping her in his custody for the past several months.

“We will hear logical and legal arguments on two issues — can the HC nullify a marriage exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 and was an NIA probe necessary,” Chief Justice Misra had observed, posting the case for hearing on October 9

Comments

Abdullah
 - 
Sunday, 8 Oct 2017

Narendra Investigation Agency(NIA).

 

They plan Allah plan, and Allah plans. Surely Allah is the Best of Planners. -Qur'an 8:30

Ibrahim
 - 
Saturday, 7 Oct 2017

The same strategy they used in Dr. Zakir Naik's matter. NIA targeting ZN

Sooraj
 - 
Saturday, 7 Oct 2017

True.. NIA taking biased decisions. Many cheddi people visited Hadiya's house but even friends cant go to her house because of security restrictions

Kumar
 - 
Saturday, 7 Oct 2017

NIA working as Modi's right hand.. 

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
June 4,2020

Bengaluru, Jun 4: The Special Investment Promotion Task Force, constituted by the Karnataka government, held its first meeting in Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru on Wednesday, June 3.

The first meeting of the task force was held under the chairmanship of Chief Secretary, Karnataka government.

The body is seeking to find ways to attract the disenchanted multi-national corporations (MNCs) which are looking to shift their manufacturing base away from China in the back-drop of the COVID-19 outbreak.

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
April 7,2020

Mangaluru, Apr 7: The virology lab set up in Wenlock Hospital here to test COVID-19 samples will start functioning from Tuesday, Karnataka District in-charge Minister Kota Srinivas Poojary said.

In his tweeter Mr Poojary said “After receiving approval from the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and National Institute of Virology (NIV), the Virology Research and Diagnostic Laboratory set up at district Wenlock will start operating from April 7. The samples for COVID-19 will be tested in the district itself. I thank the state government for helping us set up the lab.”

The new Lab becomes the 10th government lab for testing COVID-19 samples in the state.

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.