Kerala 'love jihad': Bench asks questions about ambitions, life

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday acceded to the request of Hadiya that she be first allowed to visit her friend's home as she has been mentally harassed for the past 11 months and allowed her to visit her friend before going to Salem to attend college. Hadiya, when asked by the bench to name any nearest relative or acquaintance at Salem to be named as the local guardian, said she only needed her husband in that role. The bench posed questions in English, while Hadiya replied in Malayalam, which was translated by senior advocate V. Giri who appeared for Kerala government. Hadiya's parents, her in-laws and her husband were present in the packed courtroom during the hearing.

The bench asked questions about her ambitions, life, studies and hobbies, which she replied comfortably and said she wanted to do internship of house surgeonship, a course of 11 months and wanted to stand on her own in life. Additional solicitor-general Maninder Singh, appearing for NIA, said there were compelling evidence to show a well-oiled machinery which indulges in indoctrination and conversion. “NIA's job was to give solid facts and it has been found during investigation that 11 cases were detected by Kerala police and seven such cases involved the same organisation and person.

The real question is how to establish whether a person is indoctrinated, brain-washed or programmed due to which his or her individual autonomy is compromised,” Mr Singh said. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mr Jahan, said the audio recording was nothing new and was being in circulation for past one year. "What indoctrination? She has been with her parents for past 11 months. National Commission of Women, NIA all interrogated her but state commission for women was not allowed. She is entitled to speak her mind and has her own individual autonomy and the court should hear her," Mr Sibal said.

Justice Chandrachud asked at what stage the autonomy of an individual is breached, what could be the impact and at what time can the court intervene. Referring to the 'Stockholm syndrome', he said: “Although this is not your case, in such cases there is a free consent of person who is major, but due to this syndrome, he can't take decisions freely. His individual autonomy is broken." The Kerala government said the court should first peruse the materials and then talk to the woman. "The sequence has to be different at the appellate court.

We as a state deal with this scenario everyday at ground level. The court should first look into the material and then talk to her," Kerala counsel Mr Giri said. To this, the bench said, “We are under oath to protect the constitutional values. Constitution does not give us the power to abdicate from hearing a case. We are trying to figure out a way to proceed. We don't see such cases every day." The bench then called Hadiya and asked questions while making it clear that case will be heard on merits in the third week of January.