The court also took an undertaking from the father that if the daughter's presence was required in court, she would be produced within a period of 24 hours
The Supreme Court on Friday was tasked with balancing requests made by a husband whose marriage was nullified by the Kerala High Court (KHC) against the backdrop of 'love jihad', and a father who opposed the union.
The bench comprising Chief Justice of India JS Khehar and Justice DY Chandrachud issued a notice to Kerala, the father KM Ashokan and the National Investigative Agency (NIA) and asked them to respond by August 16, when the matter will be heard next.
The court also took an undertaking from the father that if the daughter's presence was required in court, she would be produced within a period of 24 hours.
"Why does she have three names? Which 24-year-old has three names?" CJI Khehar inquired about the girl's multiple identities.
"Prima facie, the Kerala High Court had interviewed her before deciding to annul the marriage and return the child to her father. In this interview, the High Court judgment records that her answers were incoherent. So prima facie, she seemed to have been in the control of someone else," Justice Chandrachud observed.
Earlier this year, the Kerela HC nullified Shafin Jahan's marriage with 24-year-old Hadiya aka Akhila condemning it as "love jihad".
"A girl aged 24 years is weak and vulnerable, capable of being exploited in many ways. This court, exercising parens patriae jurisdiction, is concerned with the welfare of a girl of her age. The duty of this court to ensure the safety of at least the girls who are brought before it can be discharged only by ensuring that Akhila is in safe hands. The 7th respondent (Akhila's guardian) has proved that she is unworthy of the trust reposed in her, by her conduct in weaning Akhila away from her parents and by having a sham of a marriage ceremony performed with a person like Shafin Jahan, who is an accused in a criminal case, apart from being associated with persons having extremist links," the judgment read.
Jahan appealed in the top court against the HC order and sought his wife's presence since she was in her father's custody. "They (Kerala High Court) have declared a marriage void. How can this be? She should be produced before the court. Your Lordships should interview her," senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Indira Jaisingh said, representing Jahan.
Jahan claimed that Ashokan was holding Hadiya against her wishes since their marriage was "arbitrarily" annulled on May 24. However, Ashokan claimed that Sathya Sarani, an organisation that propagated conversion to Islam, influenced his daughter.
"My daughter once told me that she wants to do sheep-farming in Syria... even the most liberal of fathers would be shocked to hear this," advocate Madhvi Diwan, representing Ashokan, told the bench. Ashokan also alleged that Jahan was involved with a political outfit that was a front for the banned terror group Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). He even hinted at a possible ISIS connection.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Supreme Court")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}