http://indianexpress.com/article/india/dont-communalise-inter-faith-marriages-warns-kerala-high-court-4898313/

‘Love-jihad’, ‘ghar-wapsi’: Don’t communalise inter-faith marriages, warns
Kerala HC

Quoting American civil rights activist and poet Maya Angelou, the bench
noted in its order: “Love recognises no barriers, it jumps hurdles, leaps
fences, penetrates walls to arrive at its destination full of hope.”

Written by Shaju Philip |

Thiruvananthapuram | Updated: October 20, 2017 8:25 am

A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court Thursday came down heavily on the
campaign by various religious groups against what they describe as “Love
Jihad” and said that “every case of inter-religious marriage shall not be
portrayed on a religious canvas and create fissures in the communal harmony
otherwise existing in God’s own country Kerala”.

The division bench of V Chitambaresh and Satish Ninan was hearing a habeas
corpus petition filed by Anees Hameed, a 25-year-old from Kannur, who had
moved the high court seeking the release of his wife Sruthi Meledath from
her family’s custody. The court ruled that Sruthi be allowed to stay with
Hameed, and dismissed the petitions of the woman’s parents and a helpline
run by a Christian group that wanted to implead itself in the case.
“We are appalled to notice the recent trend in the state to sensationalise
every case of inter-religious marriage as either love jihad or ghar wapsi.
Disturbing news is coming from several parts of the country that young men
and women who undergo inter-caste marriages are threatened with violence or
violence is actually committed on them,’’ it said.
“In our opinion, such acts of violence or threats or harassment are wholly
illegal and those who commit them must be severely punished. This is a free
and democratic country and once a person becomes a major, he or she can
marry whosoever he or she likes. If the parents of the boy or girl do not
approve of such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage, the maximum they
can do is that they can cut off social relations with the son or the
daughter. But they cannot give threats or commit or instigate acts of
violence, and cannot harass the person who undergoes such inter-caste or
inter-religious marriage,’’ said the bench.

In its order dismissing the plea of the parents for custody of the woman,
the court assured that it will “protect the individual liberty of even the
lowest citizen of this country and unlock the doors of freedom if there is
a faintest doubt that she is unlawfully confined or illegally detained”.

Quoting American civil rights activist and poet Maya Angelou, the bench
noted in its order: “Love recognises no barriers, it jumps hurdles, leaps
fences, penetrates walls to arrive at its destination full of hope.”

Referring to Hameed’s wife, the court said, “We applaud the extraordinary
courage shown by Sruthi to live up to her conviction and decry the attempt
of her parents to deflect the course of justice by misleading litigations.
Sruthi is ordered to be set at liberty and it is for the couple to decide
their future course of action without interference from her parents.”
Sruthi had stated in court that after the inter-faith marriage, her family
had forcibly kept her at the Siva Sakthi Yoga Vidya Kendram near Kochi,
which helps “reconvert” Hindu women who have embraced other religions.
Deposing in court two weeks ago, Sruthi alleged that she was tortured by
counsellors and yoga trainers at the centre when she refused to leave
Hameed.

Sruthi and Hameed were students of a college in Kannur before they decided
to get married. However, after their marriage, Sruthi’s parents moved a
habeas corpus petition in the high court in May. She was produced in court
and allowed to stay with Hameed. Later, her parents reportedly took her to
the yoga centre and kept her there for nearly two months.

Last week, the Kerala government had told the Supreme Court that a police
investigation into the marriage of a Muslim man to a Hindu woman who had
embraced Islam had not found anything that would warrant a probe by the
National Investigation Agency (NIA). The government’s statement was in
relation to the marriage of Shafin Jahan with Akhila alias Hadiya, which
was set aside in May by the Kerala High Court, which entrusted the woman’s
custody to her parents. Jahan had sought a recall of an earlier order by
the Supreme Court directing the NIA to probe whether there was a wider
pattern of alleged “love jihad” in the case.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to