Hadiya's father relies on right to privacy, seeks in-camera proceedings

KM Ashokan moved court on Tuesday seeking direction for in-camera proceedings on the day his daughter Akhila/Hadiya is supposed to appear before a bench of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra.

The father's move comes days before Hadiya is set to appear before the 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.

"Given the extent of religious indoctrination by extremist elements, wherein the respondent's daughter is already spewing narratives of hell and the torment meted out to sinners, she may be subject to undue pressures which could be an obstacle to truth seeking and the dispensation of justice," Asokan's application further stated requesting the bench which also comprised Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud to recall its earlier order for an open court hearing.

"Further, this Hon'ble Court would be kind enough to take into consideration the impact on the privacy of not only Akhila but her family as well," the application read citing the recent judgment on the right to privacy.

At the previous hearing, overruling vociferous objections by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the father - Ashokan KM, the apex court ordered Akhila aka Hadiya to be produced in court on November 27 at 3 pm. CJI Misra said the court wanted to hear Akhila, whether she converted to Islam and married Shafin Jahan by choice or if she was compelled.

"If a girl comes and says I don't want to stay with my father what should the court do? We have to find out where she intends to stay," the bench had then said. "As far as her marriage is concerned its a personal choice," the bench had observed. "IT is our constitutional obligation to direct the production of the girl and ask her choice," the court added.

However, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Maninder Singh – representing the National Investigative Agency (NIA) submitted that Hadiya's case was not unique and Kerela was witnessing a trend where people were leaving to join the banned terror outfit Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

"89 cases have been identified in Kerela so far and nine are the worst." Singh said. The ASG added that Hadiya was indoctrinated by the conversion organisation Sathya Sarini and the Popular Front of India (PFI) - an Islamic fundamentalist organisation, were behind the radicalisation and hence her "free consent" should not be considered. Referring to observations made by American courts in similar cases, Singh had likened Hadiya's case to that of "psychological kidnapping."

Representing the father, senior advocate Shyam Divan said: "In a composite and plural culture like ours, constitutional courts respond to radicalisation. In the U.S. and the U.K., courts respond well before a person crosses over to the realm of criminality. Courts cannot remain silent in plural societies."

The court however, stood firm after the hour-long hearing of heated appeals. "Must direct the production of the girl. We will address all other issues in due course," the bench said. It further questioned whether the girl - who is an adult, can remain confined in the custody of the parents. "We are going by the language of the law, not by pulse or impulse," the Chief Justice said.