Hadiya tells Supreme Court she was mentally harassed in the court-mandated protective custody of her parents, and wanted only her husband Shafin Jahan to be her custodian.
New Delhi: Hadiya Jahan, the 25-year-old homoeopathy student from Kerala, told the Supreme Court Monday that she wants “freedom”, and that she intends to “stay true to her faith”.
Instead, the court only allowed her to go back to her college in Salem, Tamil Nadu, and finish her education.
Hadiya responded in open court after claims were made by her parents that she was the victim of a conspiracy of sham religious conversions of young women to Islam.
Harassed in protective custody
Hadiya, known before her conversion to Islam as Akhila Ashokan, has been in court-mandated protective custody of her parents for almost a year now. The Kerala High court – responding to a plea by Hadiya’s father Ashokan seeking her custody – had declared her marriage to Shafin Jahan invalid, even though annulling a valid marriage is not permissible in India, even by a constitutional court.
Finally allowed to make her first public appearance, Hadiya interacted with Chief Justice Dipak Misra, and justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud.
In a dramatic hearing that lasted over two-and-a-half hours, Hadiya repeatedly told the court that she did not want to stay with her parents.
“I was mentally harassed and want freedom,” she told the court in Malayalam. Senior advocate V. Giri translated her words to the judges.
Asked about her aspirations and future plans, she said she wanted to complete her house-surgeonship in Tamil Nadu, which led the court to grant her request.
Hadiya remained adamant that she would only want her husband, Shafin Jahan, to be her custodian, but the bench finally ordered to give her custody to the dean of her college.
Hadiya refused to accept the court’s suggestion that her study expenses be borne by the state government, and said her husband could take care of her expenses. The court went ahead and directed the states of Tamil Nadu and Kerala to take responsibility for her security during her house-surgeonship, and to make arrangements for her travel to Salem.
NIA sticks to indoctrination stand
The hearing also saw a heated debate between advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for Hadiya’s husband, Shafin Jahan, and Maninder Singh, who represented the National Investigation Agency.
While the NIA stuck to its stand that Hadiya was indoctrinated, Sibal made a case for her autonomy. “We are not going to argue over Hadiya’s marriage or consent, but request the court to grant her liberty to make her own decisions ahead,” he said.
Senior advocate Indira Jaising, who also represented Shafin Jahan, made an appeal for economic and physical security for Hadiya.
The court will hear the case next in January, when it is likely to decide on the NIA probe report, and on whether Hadiya’s marriage could have been annulled by the Kerala High Court.