Shafin jahan vs ashokan k m citation

(Hadiya case), wherein the right of two consenting adults to get married was upheld; and Shakti Vahini v. Court: Supreme Court Of India. The right to marry a person of choice case of ‘Shafin Jahan v. Jun 23, 2023 · miss. LAWS(SC)-2018-4-114 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. 23 The High Court, in the present case, has treaded on an area which must be out of bounds for a constitutional court. , the court observed that the society was emerging through a crucial transformational period. 1-212-854-6785 The operative part of the order reads as follows:-Considering the arguments advanced on both sides, in the facts of the present case, we hold that the High Court should not have annulled the marriage between appellant No. dayal, raghubar, k. 2 min read. VERSUS Oct 30, 2017 · Supreme Court - Daily Orders Shafin Jahan vs Asokan K. on 8 March, 2018. 8. By restoring her marriage, the Court did the right thing, but it hid its true transition from ‘Shafin Jahan v. AND OTHERS 23 June 2023 SELVI V. Akhila’s father Ashokan went to the High Court and annulled her marriage as the court allowed Ashokan to have custody of his daughter. your password. Ashokan was facilitated during a BJP event on Sabarimala held at TV Puram . Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel The Case Brief: Shafin Jahan vs Ashokan K. Apr 20, 2023 · Shafin Jahan v Union of India. Jul 8, 2019 · Even the former Chief justice of India Deepak Mishra who stood as a pioneer in judicial activism via Shakti Vakini v UOI, Shafin Jahan v Ashokan K. ’ [2018 SCC Online SC 343], after stating the law pertaining to writ of Habeas Corpus, this writ has been considered as “a great constitutional privilege” or “the first security of civil liberty”. This case was titled by the media as the “Love Jihad case. See full list on casemine. SHAFIN JAHAN VS. Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General for the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and Mr. The decision demonstrated how vulnerable women are in society. (Satya Prasoon and Ashwini Tallur are lawyers working with the Centre for Law and Policy Research, Bengaluru. (2018 SC 343)- This case was famous by the name of Hadiya case. (2018), a two-judge of the Supreme Court, consisting of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justice A. (S) on CaseMine. Asokan K. 5777/2017 1 ITEM NO. 9, Hadiya alias Akhila Asokan, in a Habeas Corpus petition under Article 226 of the Dec 18, 2018 · Hadiya's father KM Ashokan. 11 COURT NO. KOCHI: In a new twist in the sensational Hadiya case, K M Asokan, the father of Akhila, also known as Hadiya, who embraced Islam for marriage, filed a habeas Kanniammal [(2010) 5 SCC 600], Indra Sarma Vs. Conclusion. ) No. Forgot your The intimacies of marriage lie within a core zone of privacy and are inviolable as the right to privacy and autonomy of each individual includes the ability to take decisions on aspects which define one's identity. 1 SECTION II-B S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl. Hadiya was allowed to re-join her medical college to continue her studies and her marriage with Shafin Jahan was restored. (Love Jihad Case) Court Name: Supreme Court Of India Judgement Decision: 9 April 2018 Main Issues. Khanwilkar, established that the right to choose one's spouse is inherent to Article 21 of the Constitution. ’s daughter Hadiya, formerly known as Akhila, a homoeopathic medical student, was reportedly indoctrinated and converted to Islam. human rights. , (hereafter, “ Shafin Jahan ”)22, brought home that expressing choice is in “accord with the law” and is “acceptance of indi v idual identity. The Hadiya case ( Shafin Jahan v. writ of habeas corpus. Decided on April 09,2018 Shafin Jahan Appellant. case popularly known as the Hadiya case. : (2018)16 SCC 368: 2018 (2) KHC 890 and the judgment of this Court in Anjitha K. 1 – The case made the headlines when the SC ordered the National Investigating Agency (NIA), India’s premier Counter-Terrorist Agency to look into the suspected indoctrination of a 24 year old Hindu woman, Hadiya who converted to Islam and married the petitioner, Shafin Jahan. Supreme Court Observer Sep 4, 2018 · Shafin Jahan v. On March 8th 2018, the Supreme Court set aside the annulment of the Get free access to the complete judgment in Shafin Jahan Petitioner(S) v. Shafin Jahan . CITATION: SHAFIN JAHAN VS ASHOKAN K. Her father K. on 22 February, 2018 Bench: Chief Justice, A. Citation: Criminal Appeal No. Ashokan is also known as Hadiya’s case revolves around intercaste marriage and a woman’s right to marry. Judgement Decision: 9 April 2018. ) Sep 19, 2020 · The Supreme Court by setting aside the judgment of the High Court of Kerala of annulling the marriage between Shafin Jahan and Hadiya allowed the appeal by pronouncing order on 8th March 2018. Apr 9, 2018 · The Kerala High Court judgement stated that ‘a girl aged 24 years is weak and vulnerable, capable of being exploited in many ways’. 4 and Shakti Vahini v. These study notes are curated by experts and cover all the essential topics and concepts, making your preparation more efficient and effective. Court: Supreme Court of India Citation: Shafin Jahan V. He alleged that Hadiya has been deceived and Apr 10, 2018 · The Supreme Court on Monday delivered a detailed judgment in the Hadiya case, almost a month after it set aside the Kerala High Court judgment calling Hadiya's marriage to Shafin Jahan a “sham Nov 21, 2019 · Pursuant to the Kerala High Court judgment, Shafin Jahan approached the Supreme Court in a special leave petition challenging the order of the Kerala High Court. In Shafin Jahan (supra) the Supreme Court has held as under: "75. Hadiya will testify before the Supreme Court today after her family alleged that she forced to convert Dec 8, 2023 · 08 Dec 2023, 8:01 am. (S). L. , Judgement. The ruling recognised the right to choose one’s partner as a facet of the fundamental right to liberty and dignity. The views of the High Court have encroached into a private space reserved for women and men in which neither law nor the judges can intrude. Coram: 3. The duty cast on this Court to ensure the safety of at least the girls who are brought before i. State of Kerala & Ors: 2019(2) KHC 220, the learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that the restrictions imposed as well as her expulsion consequent to it are illegal as it j u d g m e n t markandey katju, j. Shafin Jahan v. The Feb 11, 2021 · The court also referred to the judgments in Shafin Jahan v. state of maharashtra citation 1962 air 605, 1962 scr supl. The case becomes even more complex when a change of Dec 15, 2020 · She referred to the Supreme Court’s decisions in Shakti Vahini v Union of India (2018) and Shafin Jahan v Ashokan K. 14 COURT NO. Shafin Jahan (S) v. Union of India. Nearly 70 countries have explicit laws Nov 28, 2023 · Back in 2016, when Akhila Ashokan decided to embrace Islam and marry Shafin Jahan, Kerala saw a new wave of tumultuous occurrences unfold. v. 366 of 2018 (arising out of SLP (Crl. Nov 27, 2017 · Supreme Court - Daily Orders Shafin Jahan vs Asokan K. Aug 23, 2017 · On 7 January 2017, a police report was filed in the Kerala High Court to investigate the role of a few individuals who had facilitated Akhila’s conversion to Islam and her marriage to Shafin Jahan. A. 16 COURT NO. Ashokan K. 4 Inti m acies of m arriage lie within a core zone of pri v acy, which is in v iolable and e ve n m atters of faith would ha ve the least effect on the m . The intimacies of marriage lie within a core zone of privacy and are inviolable as the right to privacy and autonomy of each individual includes the ability to take decisions on aspects which define one's identity. (Arising out of S. Y. lared that the marriage between Hadiya and Shafin Jahan is nul. Asokan K. Asokan - 08 Mar 18. 9, Hadiya aliasthat she had entered into Feb 10, 2024 · Legal experts told The Quint that this against the Shafin Jahan vs Asokan K. (2018) Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that the law pertaining to Writ of Habeas Corpus as “a great constitutional privilege” or “the first security of civil liberty”. Columbia University 91 Claremont Ave, Suite 523 New York, NY 10027. M Ashok an case, where a Hindu women named Hidaya convert herself to Islam religion, upon this her father criticized that she had been indoctrinated' into embracing Islam and alsoa victim of a movement to convert Hindu women to another religion and fear to transfer them to other country. 08. Whether the High court has the jurisdiction under article 226 of Constitution of India to null and void the marriage of an adult? In Shafin Jahan versus Asokan K. 2017 and accordingly direct the presence of the daughter of the first respondent at 3. In a judgment rendered on 25 May last year, a Division Bench of Kerala High Court had Shafin Jahan vs Asokan K. In the said judgments the Court had upheld that the right of two adults to get married is recognized under Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution. 3, this Court noticed that the society was emerging through a crucial transformational period. and Justice K. (S) 1. The rights of women to marry against the wishes of their parents patriae jurisdiction is concerned with the welfare of a girl of her age. on 27 November, 2017 Bench: Chief Justice, A. A criminal appeal. Nov 25, 2023 · To bring her back in line – to reorient her, towards the “service of her motherland” (“Asokan K. The Court then cited Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which includes the right to marry as a human right as well as Shafin Jahan v Asokan K. While recognizing the significance of social values and morals, the court emphasized that [9] Shafin Jahan V. The Supreme Court stated that the Kerala High Court has crossed all its limit by annulling the marriage of the Hadiya while hearing the petition of Publications. Shafin Jahan vs Asokan K. ”23 JUDGMENT (ORAL) Alka Sarin, J. Puttaswamy v. This writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer for issuing a writ of certiorari and /or mandamus for quashing the Sessions Trial No. , 8th MARCH, 2018. nanavati v. advanced on both sides, in the facts of the present case, we hold that the High Court should not have annulled the marriage between appellant No. 366 of 2018 (Arising out of S. com Jun 2, 2020 · Case Name- Shafin Jahan vs Ashokan K. vaishnavi krushna parate[1] in the supreme court of india name of the case k. Dec 9, 2023 · Hadiya, aka Akhila Ashokan, a Kerala woman who was at the center of arguably the most high-profile 'love jihad' case the country has seen so far has said that she has divorced her husband Shafin Jahan, and is now married to someone else. CITATION: LL 2021 SC 79. M Ashokan filed a writ petition in High Court of Kerala. In Shafin Jahan v. on 3 October, 2017 Bench: Chief Justice, A. k. ) The appeal filed by Shafin Jahan has been heard finally. Kottayam: Father of Hadiya (maiden name Akhila), who was caught in a religious conversion row after she married a Muslim youth, has joined the BJP. 2 COURT NO. Ashokan, found out about the marriage, he filed a Writ Petition in the Kerala High Court. Indira Jaising, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Mar 8, 2018 · The case concerns Hadiya’s conversion to Islam and her subsequent marriage to a Muslim man Shafin Jahan. ) 5777/17 1 ITEM NO. KHANWILKAR, HON'BLE DR. 1, Shafin Jahan and respondent No. (Love Jihad Case) Court Name: Supreme Court Of India. M Ashokan, where the Hindu woman named Akhila Ashokan who embraced herself to 'Islamic' religion of her own choice and will and got married to Shafin Jahan at the age twenty five years and changed her name as 'Hadiya Jahan'. Global Freedom of Expression. Sep 9, 2020 · The case of Shafin Jahan v. JUSTICE A. Apr 19, 2018 · One of the sorriest episodes in India’s judicial history was finally brought to an end in March with the Supreme Court judgment in Shafin Jahan v. & ORS. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel. Case Status. Shafin Jahan VS K. M on 27. 297/2016 passed by the High Court Of Kerala At Ernakulam) SHAFIN JAHAN Petitioner(s The Court also held that the expression ‘bride’ in the HMA cannot have a static meaning and must be interpreted in light of the legal system as it exists today. In response, Mr Shafin Jahan filed a special leave petition, challenging the judgement. Case Type. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 9, Hadiya alias Akhila Asokan, in a Habeas Corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, the validity of the marriage 61 between Shafin Jahan and Hadiya shall not form the subject matter of the investigation. She then met a Muslim man named Shafin Jahan and married him at the age of twenty-five. 1201 of 2001 under sections 366 and 368 of the Indian Penal Code arising out of FIR No. (Hadiya Marriage Case) is an invaluable resource that delves deep into the core of the Judiciary Exams exam. ) upheld Hadiya’s choice of religion and marriage partner and reiterated that an adult’s right to make Shafin Jahan v. Heard Mr. Citation – Criminal Appeal No. ) patriae jurisdiction is concerned with the welfare of a girl of her age. Haris Beeran, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. 366 Of 2018 Case Name: Shafin Jahan v/s Ashokan K. (2018). Asokan KM & Ors . M. 5 This Bench of three judges pronounced the operative part of its order on 8 March 2018 and allowed the appeal by setting aside the judgment of the High Court annulling the marriage between Shafin Jahan and Hadiya. Supreme Court - Daily Orders Shafin Jahan vs Asokan K. h) The High Court, after hearing all the parties, believed that Hadiya was a female in her twenties, which is a vulnerable age. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are inclined to modify the order dated 16. Union of India : (2014) 5 SCC 438, Shafin Jahan v. 3 With these directions, the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court. The SC in March 2018 set aside a Kerala High Court judgment that annulled the marriage of a 24-year-old woman who converted to Islam and married a man of her choice. Ashokan was cited as an example of "patriarchal autocracy and potentially self-obsession with the sense that a girl is a chattel. 2016, when the case came up for admission, the Division Bench directed the Government pleader to get instructions regarding the action, if any, taken on the aforesaid complaint of Asokan. subbarao, s. Date: Apr 9, 2018. The High Court, at SHAFIN JAHAN Vs. Chandrachud SLP(Crl. Click here to Read/Download Judgment. 4 Intimacies of marriage lie within a core zone of privacy, which is inviolable and even matters of faith would have the least effect on them. " The Kerala High Court's decision demonstrates the patriarchal order in society, which is a disgrace on the nation. das constitution/statutes the constitution of SHAFIN JAHAN Vs ASOKAN K. Union of India 5 to reaffirm that an adult’s right to “choose a life partner of his/her choice” [p. 8 wherein it has been clearly recognized that an individual‘s exercise of choice in choosing a partner is a feature of dignity and, therefore, it is protected under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. 336 of 2000 registered at Police Station Kanniammal [(2010) 5 SCC 600], Indra Sarma Vs. 366 Of 2018. Mar 8, 2018 · 4 The appeal filed by Shafin Jahan has been heard finally. -000366-000366 / 2018 Diary number: 19702 / 2017 Advocates: Pallavi Pratap Vs Mar 9, 2018 · Hadiya's father, Asokan K M, alleges that his daughter may have been taken into illegal custody by individuals associated with the banned Popular Front of India, including her husband, shafin jahan. Ashokan & Ors Law Times Journal. Case Name: Shafin Jahan v/s Ashokan K. (1) 567 date of the case 24th november 1961 petitioner k. 01. 1. 366 OF 2018. Hadiya is a party to these proceedings. Wednesday, November 30, 2022 Sign in. nanavati respondent state of maharashtra bench/judges k. Ashokan K. , 2018 SCC Online SC 343. Welcome! Log into your account. Union of India & Anr. & Ors. 5777 of 2017) Shafin Jahan v. 2. K M Ashokan joined the saffron brigade by giving a missed call to the phone number of the party. Bench Strength. 6. Chandrachud 1 ITEM NO. ) 5777/2017 1 ITEM NO. It opined that a girl aged 24 years is weak and vulnerable and capable of being exploited in many ways. Moreover, nothing contained in the interim order of this Court will be construed as empowering the investigating agency to interfere in the lives which the young couple seeks to lead as law abiding citizens. 3, this Court noticed that the society was e mer ging through a crucial transfor m ational period. Feb 28, 2019 · The Hon'ble Supreme Court demonstrated the manner of applying transformative constitutionalism by referring to the cases titled Shafin Jahan vs. M. The High Court was of the view that at Mar 8, 2018 · Hadiya appeared before the High Court and a statement was made that she had entered into marriage with Shafin Jahan, the appellant herein. Akhila, who was later known as Hadiya, was allegedly brainwashed, converted to Islam, and married a Muslim. JUSTICE D. She was going back Oct 3, 2017 · Supreme Court - Daily Orders Shafin Jahan vs Asokan K. Number of Opinion(s) May 1, 2018 · Hadiya’s was an ordinary case made unnecessarily extraordinary. 1 – Why did the Supreme Court Intervene? 8. K. M & Ors. 1 SECTION S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Diary No(s). " And also stated that right to into marriage with Shafin Jahan, who was employed in the Gulf and was willing to take Hadiya out of India. Paragraph no. , or the Hadiya case as we’ve come Apr 9, 2018 · Shafin Jahan (S) v. Apr 21, 2023 · Justice Chandrachud's concurring opinion in the case (Shafin Jahan v Ashokan K. —Heard through video conferencing. Union of India and others 7 and Shafin Jahan v. The annulment of marriage in a Habeas Corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India should be carefully considered, especially when the respondent adm. Cited By: 220. Sep 6, 2018 · Further, the Court also relied upon its decisions in Shafin Jahan v. May 7, 2023 · The Kerala Story which was released on May 5 has once again brought attention to the Shafin Jahan vs. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Shafin Jahan v. & Ors 2018 judgement, where the SC held that an adult woman (18 years and above) could decide who she wanted to Dec 15, 2023 · For K M Ashokan, known to the world as 'Hadiya's father', his world changed drastically the day he left his only child Akhila at the railway station in Kerala on January 3, 2016. Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE, HON'BLE MR. . [(2018) 16 SCC 368] that the society cannot determine how individuals live their lives, especially when they are major, irrespective of the fact that the relation between two major individuals may be termed as unsocial. S. Asokan sought a thorough investigation from the National Investigation Agency on the issue of Hindu women being converted and married to Muslim men to be sent outside the country. 19702/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24-05-2017 in WPCRL No. m. M, Navtej singh Johar v UOI and in Sabarimala case permitting entry of women, etc. Supreme Court Judgment- Shafin Jahan vs. Jose & Anr. )No. The case becomes even more complex when a change of Jan 19, 2019 · The Supreme Court allowed the NIA probe in criminal matters of the petitioner without accepting the request of the petitioner for the reconsideration of such order. Oct 3, 2023 · Shafin Jahan v. This Bench of three judges pronounced the operative part of its order on 8 March 2018 and allowed the appeal by setting aside the judgment of the High Court annulling the marriage between Shafin Jahan and Hadiya. 53 and 54 of the said judgment is reproduced as under:- Shafin Jahan v. on 4 August, 2017 Bench: Chief Justice, D. 107] is a facet of individual liberty. & ors. Sep 26, 2019 · Shafin Jahan vs. The case guides and directs the freedom and liberty of an individual. NOT OVERRULED CRIMINAL APPEAL 3 2 / 0. Interview of Shafin Jahanv. The High Court gave Hadiya’s parents custody of her. No. Ashokan’ to the ‘Love Jihad’ case. 00 P. 2017 We may further add that this Court shall speak to her not in camera but in open Court. Khanwilkar, D. also known as the Hadiya marriage case is a landmark judgement when it comes to the freedom to profess or propagate any religion. Khanwilkar , Justice DY Chandrachud This matter was heard by NIA not their marriage issue but on allegation of Hadiya father that she would be transported to Syria. ) Aug 4, 2017 · Supreme Court - Daily Orders Shafin Jahan vs Asokan K. [10] K. When Akhila’s father, Mr. The reasoned judgment will follow. 5777 of 2017) Coram- CJI Dipak Misra , Justice A. Leave granted. vs The Superintendent Of Police,” 2017: 32) that the court believed Hadiya was committed to before she married Shefin Jahan – the Kerala High Court then remanded her to the custody of her parents. Jul 26, 2021 · Independent Thought vs. VKV Sarma [(2013) 15 SCC 755] and Shafin Jahan vs. (Hadiya Marriage Case) Court – Supreme Court of India. CHANDRACHUD Judgment by: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Case number: Crl. 11. 23. ASOKAN K. Nov 27, 2017 · Hadiya, who grew up as Akhila Ashokan in Kerala, married a Muslim man Shafin Jahan last year. 1, Shafin Jahan and respondent No. M) was a 2017–2018 Indian Supreme Court case that affirmed the validity of the marriage of Hadiya (formerly Akhila Ashokan) and Shafin Jehan, which was challenged by Hadiya's family. Ashokan argued that Hadiya had fallen prey to an organised conspiracy and the conspirators were trying to traffic her to Syria to join the Islamic State. This case revolved around the marriage of a woman and how her father questioned her marriage as it was done without his choice. The operative part of the order reads as follows:­ Considering the arguments advanced on both sides, in the facts of the present case, we hold that the High Court should not have annulled the marriage between appellant No. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Shafin Jahan v. P. and Ors. On 14. External identifier: Criminal Appeal No. 12 COURT NO. Oct 25, 2021 · Hadiya Jahan (originally Akhila Ashokan) converted to Islam during her medical studies in Coimbatore. Asokan K M & Ors. SHAFIN JAHAN VS ASOKAN K. Oct 7, 2023 · Published on: October 7, 2023 at 16:12 IST. She converted her religion into Islam when studying Homeopathy (BHMS) from Shivraj Homeopathic Medical College, Salem in Coimbatore Decision. 62. 5777 of 2017) FACTS: Hadiya Jahan, known initially as Akhila Ashokan, was a Hindu. ”. your username. The present criminal writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for enforcement of fundamental rights of the petitioners seeking protection of their life and liberty as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India at the hands 11. Kapil Sibal and Ms. is reluctant to criminalise marital rape and has abdicated his duty. 72, para. India - Supreme Court Family Law Marriage and Divorce Oct 30, 2017 · 1. Whether the High court has the jurisdiction under article 226 of Constitution of India to null and void the marriage of an adult? The Kerala Story, a film about three women who were trafficked to Syria after converting to Islam has refocussed attention on the Shafin Jahan versus Ashokan K M case. (Crl. on 8 March, 2018 Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 SC 1136 Author: Chief Justice 4 The appeal filed by Shafin Jahan has been heard finally. 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA AIR 2010 SC 1974 5 March 2024 In Shafin Jahan v. Puttaswamy case, it was held that "where the autonomy of an individual inter alia in relation to family and marriage were held to be integral to the dignity of the individual. on 30 October, 2017 Bench: Chief Justice, A. The Court made the following pertinent observations: - “28. 5777/17 1 ITEM NO. Dec 8, 2023 · On 21 December, 2016, Hadiya appeared in court with a man, who she said was her husband, Shafin Jahan. oe lx pj te tb cb by fj yw la