You can’t question the legitimacy of Hadiya’s marriage: SC tells NIA

News Network
January 23, 2018

In what can be termed as an interim relief for Hadiya, a Hindu convert Muslim college student from Kerala, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court upheld her right to select her husband and observed that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) cannot probe her marital status.

The court said that the NIA probe will not have any bearing on the legitimacy of Hadiya's marriage to Shafin Jahan which was annulled by Kerala High Court. The apex court will continue to hear the matter on 22 February.

"You can probe anything but not on marital status, marriage has to be separated from any criminal action, aspect and conspiracy, otherwise we will be creating a bad precedent," the bench headed by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra said.

"We will only examine whether the court can cancel the marriage. We can't question the legitimacy of her marriage, it is Hadiya who will decide who is a good human being or bad," the judges said.

In November, the Supreme Court freed Hadiya from her parents, who had insisted that she had been brainwashed and forced to convert, and allowed her to resume her studies at a college in Tamil Nadu, where she was studying before she married Shafin Jahan.

After conversion to Islam, Hadiya had met Shafin through a matrimonial website and later they got married. Hadiya's parents refused to accept her marriage to Shafin Jahan, claiming that he wants to take her to Syria. Hadiya, who doesn’t even holds a passport has rubbished her parents charge as a blatant lie.

In May 2017, on the Hindu parents’ petition, the Kerala High Court annulled Hadiya's marriage and ordered her to go back to her parents. She was kept under house arrest for several months where she was allegedly tortured by her parents and Hindutva extremists groups.

Shafin Jahan had challenged the order in the Supreme Court, arguing that as an adult, she has the right to decide. In an interim order on a petition by Jahan challenging the high court verdict, the Supreme Court had on 27 November 2017 set Hadiya free from the custody of her parents. The apex court, however, did not accept her plea to be allowed to go with her husband.

Comments

Indian
 - 
Wednesday, 24 Jan 2018

NIA has been getting nice slaps from various authorities for false investigations. earlier it was against the peace promoter Zakir naik & now Hadiya's case. I think NIA has an influence by RSS to distroy the nation and our future generation. People of india should unite together & stand against any injustice to anyone irrespective of caste, religion or colour. 

Abu Muhammad
 - 
Tuesday, 23 Jan 2018

Sangeeth - you Feku's liar agent, RSS & BJP has direct links with ISIS ( Israeli Secret Intelligence Service) and NOT these poor couple (Haadia) has no Passport so far.

Truth
 - 
Tuesday, 23 Jan 2018

They spent many months for unwanted issue because of saffrons. Hadiya's father playing for saffrons. Let Hadiya and Shafin live peacefully

Danish
 - 
Tuesday, 23 Jan 2018

Why NIA and Hindutva org teasing Hadiya and her hus this much. Even we cant bear by listening their matter. Too bad

Sangeeth
 - 
Tuesday, 23 Jan 2018

Supreme court taking double standard. Their marriage may cause serious security issue. They have IS links

Suresh Kalladka
 - 
Tuesday, 23 Jan 2018

All because of Feku. Judiciary, economy everything feku destroyed. People loosing faith in justice and judiciary

Mohan
 - 
Tuesday, 23 Jan 2018

She is major. Why nobody listening her words. She can decide. She has the right.

Kumar
 - 
Tuesday, 23 Jan 2018

Good. tight slap on 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.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

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
November 14,2024

Bengaluru: Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar on Thursday backed Chief Minister Siddaramaiah over his claim that the BJP had offered Rs 50 crore each to 50 Congress MLAs in an attempt to "topple" the state government.

Addressing reporters here, Shivakumar, also the Congress state president, said, “The BJP indeed lured 50 Congress MLAs with Rs 50 crore each.”

He defended Siddaramaiah’s statement and said the Congress MLAs were briefed about the BJP’s alleged 'Operation Lotus', a term used to describe the BJP's attempts to destabilise ruling governments through horse-trading.

“Some of our MLAs informed the Chief Minister about this matter, and he, in turn, shared it with the media,” Shivakumar said.

At an event in Mysuru, Siddaramaiah reiterated the claim that "none of the Congress MLAs had accepted the offer".

He also accused the BJP of filing false cases against him in a bid to "remove him and overthrow his government".

The BJP has yet to respond to the allegations.

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
November 22,2024

Mangaluru: A man fell victim to an online scam, losing Rs 1.7 crore after fraudsters posed as officials from TRAI. According to a complaint filed at the CEN police station, the incident began on November 11, when the complainant received a call from an unknown number at 9:49 am.

The caller, claiming to represent TRAI, alleged that another mobile number registered under the complainant's name was involved in illegal activities in Andheri (East), Mumbai. The caller further stated that an FIR was lodged against the complainant for harassment under the guise of marketing. He was instructed to contact Andheri (East) police station immediately or risk his mobile service being deactivated within two hours.

The complainant was subsequently connected to an individual named Pradeep Sawant, who claimed the complainant was implicated in a money laundering scheme linked to the Naresh Goyal fraud case. Sawant alleged that a fraudulent bank account under the complainant's name was opened at Canara Bank, Andheri, and used to purchase a SIM card for illegal activities. He warned that the complainant could face arrest.

Later, the complainant was contacted via WhatsApp video call by individuals posing as Rahul Kumar (a police officer) and Akanksha (a CBI officer). They allegedly sent fabricated CBI documents to his WhatsApp number. The fraudsters demanded money to "resolve" the case. Fearing threats, the complainant allegedly transferred Rs 1.7 crore through RTGS in batches of Rs 53 lakh, Rs 74 lakh, and Rs 44 lakh between November 13 and 19. A case has been registered at the CEN police station and an investigation is ongoing.

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.