<p class="intro" style="text-align: justify;">The brief but eventful hearing today in the <strong>Hadiya</strong> case was definitely an indicator of how gripping the case could be in the days to come.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">A Bench of Chief Justice <strong>JS Khehar</strong> and Justice <strong>DY Chandrachud</strong> grilled Senior Advocates <strong>Kapil Sibal</strong> and <strong>Indira Jaising</strong>, who appeared for Hadiya’s husband, before issuing notice to the respondents – Hadiya’s father and State of Kerala.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Advocate <strong>Madhavi Divan</strong> appeared for Ashokan, father of Hadiya, who is respondent 1 in the matter.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">When the case came up for hearing, Sibal submitted that Hadiya should be produced before the court.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“They have declared a marriage void. How can this be? She should be produced before the court. Your Lordships should interview her.”</em></p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Madhavi Divan, however, strongly objected.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;"><em>“Please keep this matter on Tuesday. Heavens will not fall. The matter is very sensitive. There is far more than meets the eye”</em>, submitted Divan, while also stating that the affiliations of the husband and the woman who converted Hadiya are all under scanner.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Sibal retorted by stating that all these should be shown on record.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Whatever she has stated, let her show it on record.”</em></p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“I will”</em>, retorted Divan.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Do it now”</em>, said Sibal.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">The Bench then proceeded to ask questions to Sibal and Jaising. CJI Khehar said,</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Why does she have three names? We will not meet her unless it is absolutely necessary</em>.”</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“It is absolutely necessary your lordships”</em>, replied Jaising.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">It was then Justice Chandrachud’s turn. Quoting from the judgment, he said,</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“The judgment says that the High Court interviewed her and she could not give coherent answers.”</em></p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Sibal vehemently denied it.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Chandrachud responded by saying that heavens will not fall if Hadiya is not produced.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“She has been in custody since May 20. She is not a child”</em>, replied Sibal.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Did she know the person whom she married?”</em>, asked CJI Khehar.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Sibal said that she did not and that it was an arranged marriage through a matrimonial website.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“She converted to Islam much before marriage. They started looking for alliances in August through matrimonial website and the marriage took place in December”</em>, said Sibal.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Does the man whom she married have criminal antecedents?”,</em> probed Khehar J.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Sibal vehememtly denied the same.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“No my lord. Where is the record for his antecedents?”</em>, he asked.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Your own Facebook posts.”</em>, was Chandrachud’s reply.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">The Court said that it will have to hear the respondents before passing any order.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">It then issued noticed to Hadiya’s father, Ashokan, the State of Kerala, and the National Investigation Agency. It also directed Ashokan to submit all relevant material on record within a week.</p>.<p>Further, the Court also took an undertaking from the respondents stating that Hadiya would be produced before the Court within 24 hours, should the Court require her appearance.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">The matter will now be heard on August 16.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Hadiya had converted to Islam of her own volition, and subsequently married a Muslim man Shafin Jahan. In a <a href="https://barandbench.com/muslim-kerala-high-court/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">judgement dated 25 May this year</a>, a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court annulled her marriage, terming it to be a “sham” and directed that Hadiya be placed in the protective custody of her Hindu parents.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Her husband subsequently <span style="color: #993366;"><a href="https://barandbench.com/husband-moves-sc-love-jihad-ruling-kerala-high-court/">preferred an SLP</a></span> before the Supreme Court challenging the decision of the High Court.</p>.<p><em>Image of Kapil Sibal taken from <a href="http://media2.intoday.in/indiatoday/images/stories//2016August/kapii_650x350_080816091040.jpg">here</a>.</em></p>
<p class="intro" style="text-align: justify;">The brief but eventful hearing today in the <strong>Hadiya</strong> case was definitely an indicator of how gripping the case could be in the days to come.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">A Bench of Chief Justice <strong>JS Khehar</strong> and Justice <strong>DY Chandrachud</strong> grilled Senior Advocates <strong>Kapil Sibal</strong> and <strong>Indira Jaising</strong>, who appeared for Hadiya’s husband, before issuing notice to the respondents – Hadiya’s father and State of Kerala.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Advocate <strong>Madhavi Divan</strong> appeared for Ashokan, father of Hadiya, who is respondent 1 in the matter.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">When the case came up for hearing, Sibal submitted that Hadiya should be produced before the court.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“They have declared a marriage void. How can this be? She should be produced before the court. Your Lordships should interview her.”</em></p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Madhavi Divan, however, strongly objected.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;"><em>“Please keep this matter on Tuesday. Heavens will not fall. The matter is very sensitive. There is far more than meets the eye”</em>, submitted Divan, while also stating that the affiliations of the husband and the woman who converted Hadiya are all under scanner.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Sibal retorted by stating that all these should be shown on record.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Whatever she has stated, let her show it on record.”</em></p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“I will”</em>, retorted Divan.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Do it now”</em>, said Sibal.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">The Bench then proceeded to ask questions to Sibal and Jaising. CJI Khehar said,</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Why does she have three names? We will not meet her unless it is absolutely necessary</em>.”</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“It is absolutely necessary your lordships”</em>, replied Jaising.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">It was then Justice Chandrachud’s turn. Quoting from the judgment, he said,</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“The judgment says that the High Court interviewed her and she could not give coherent answers.”</em></p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Sibal vehemently denied it.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Chandrachud responded by saying that heavens will not fall if Hadiya is not produced.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“She has been in custody since May 20. She is not a child”</em>, replied Sibal.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Did she know the person whom she married?”</em>, asked CJI Khehar.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Sibal said that she did not and that it was an arranged marriage through a matrimonial website.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“She converted to Islam much before marriage. They started looking for alliances in August through matrimonial website and the marriage took place in December”</em>, said Sibal.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Does the man whom she married have criminal antecedents?”,</em> probed Khehar J.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Sibal vehememtly denied the same.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“No my lord. Where is the record for his antecedents?”</em>, he asked.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em>“Your own Facebook posts.”</em>, was Chandrachud’s reply.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">The Court said that it will have to hear the respondents before passing any order.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">It then issued noticed to Hadiya’s father, Ashokan, the State of Kerala, and the National Investigation Agency. It also directed Ashokan to submit all relevant material on record within a week.</p>.<p>Further, the Court also took an undertaking from the respondents stating that Hadiya would be produced before the Court within 24 hours, should the Court require her appearance.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">The matter will now be heard on August 16.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Hadiya had converted to Islam of her own volition, and subsequently married a Muslim man Shafin Jahan. In a <a href="https://barandbench.com/muslim-kerala-high-court/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">judgement dated 25 May this year</a>, a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court annulled her marriage, terming it to be a “sham” and directed that Hadiya be placed in the protective custody of her Hindu parents.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Her husband subsequently <span style="color: #993366;"><a href="https://barandbench.com/husband-moves-sc-love-jihad-ruling-kerala-high-court/">preferred an SLP</a></span> before the Supreme Court challenging the decision of the High Court.</p>.<p><em>Image of Kapil Sibal taken from <a href="http://media2.intoday.in/indiatoday/images/stories//2016August/kapii_650x350_080816091040.jpg">here</a>.</em></p>