Ashokan, the father of a woman from Kerala whose conversion to Islam and marriage to a Muslim man set off a legal case that the Supreme Court is now hearing, told the court in an affidavit that there had been an attempt to take his daughter Hadiya to Yemen, Bar and Bench reported on Tuesday.
Ashokan had approached the Kerala High Court in January 2017, claiming that Muslim organisations planned to force Hadiya to join the Islamic State group, and that her husband Shafin Jahan was involved in terrorist activities. He had told the courts that two of Hadiya’s classmates at Sivaraj college in Salem – Faseena and Jaseena – had influenced her, and their father had got Hadiya to convert to Islam.
In this affidavit, Ashokan claimed that Hadiya was already in a vulnerable state before that. She had reportedly met a person named Shanib, who introduced her to his elder sister Sherin Shahana, The News Minute reported. Fasil Musthafa, Shahana’s husband, allegedly asked Hadiya to become his second wife and told her he would take her to Yemen.
After Hadiya’s friend Ambily counselled her against marrying Musthafa, she “withdrew from the marriage proposal”, Ashokan said. She was then taken to Popular Front of India leader AS Sainaba, who convinced her to convert to Islam, Ashokan alleged. Sainaba had earlier dismissed this allegation.
Ashokan, who had earlier said that his daughter had told him she wanted to go to Syria to rear sheep, told the court he did not record their conversation.
Ashokan also refuted the accusation that his wife had attempted to poison Hadiya. “My wife cannot even dream of causing the slightest harm to our only daughter, without her, we have nothing in the world,” Ashokan said. “These absurd, far-fetched and fanciful allegations show how deeply she has been brainwashed and indoctrinated. The first and last lesson radical groups give to the persons brought under their fold is to hate their parents unless they follow their path.”
In a hearing last month, the Supreme Court had asked if it could interfere when two consenting adults had married at will. “We cannot say this marriage is not in her best interest,” the bench had said. “We cannot decide whether it is a right choice. We cannot annul a marriage on the ground that the person she has married is not the right person.”
The court will hear the case again on Thursday.
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!