Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to modify its order on a plea filed by KM Asokan seeking an in-camera trial on November 27, when his daughter Akhila/Hadiya is set to appear before a court bench comprising Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra.
The bench, which also comprised Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, ruled that the decision to conduct the trial in-camera would be taken on the day of the hearing itself. However, it allowed Asokan's counsel to mention the matter again on Monday.
The advocate appearing for Asokan, however, said the matter would become infructuous if the decision is taken on the day of the trial itself.
The father's move comes days before Hadiya is set to appear in the Supreme Court to finally speak up and give her side of the story.
Hadiya, who has been caught in the eye of the storm for converting to Islam and marrying Shafin Jahan, is supposed to appear before the court bench on November 27.
"It is respectfully submitted that a family's anguish and misery caused by the acts of an extremist organisation should not be reduced to a public spectacle and or a reality show. The object of the production of Akhila in a court is to enable this court to arrive at the truth and ascertain the role of PFI/other extremist elements, and whether there is a network in place or systematic conversion and radicalisation activities," the application filed through advocate Madhavi Divan said.
In May, the Kerala High Court had nullified Jahan's marriage with 24-year-old Hadiya aka Akhila condemning it as "love jihad".
Jahan appealed in the top court against the HC order and sought his wife's presence since she was in her father's custody. Jahan claimed that Ashokan was holding Hadiya against her wishes since their marriage was "arbitrarily" annulled. However, Ashokan — the father, claimed that Sathya Sarani who propagated conversion to Islam, influenced his daughter.
Flip-flopping on this issue, at the previous hearing, the apex court finally agreed to meet Hadiya in person to decide for itself whether her move was by her free-will or whether she was "brainwashed".
){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}
){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}