Shefin Jahan is a terrorist, repeats Hadiya's father

Shefin Jahan is a terrorist, repeats Hadiya's father

Acting on a plea filed by her father, who alleged his daughter was being indoctrinated and may be taken overseas by extremist Islamic organizations, the Kerala high court annulled her marriage on 25 May 2017 and sent her to her parents' home, triggering an uproar.

He was responding to the apex court order which set aside an earlier high court judgement that annulled the marriage.

He had alleged that that his daughter was brainwashed and was forced to convert to Islam as a victim of 'love jihad (term used by right wing groups to accuse Muslim men of drawing Hindu women into relationships, converting them to Islam)' and directed Hadiya to stay with he parents.

"But for my efforts, my daughter would have been transported overseas and become untraceable", he said while alleging that Hadiya was so deeply conditioned that she has gone to the extent of alleging that her mother attempted to poison or drug her.

The Supreme Court in its verdict said the girl had appeared before the court on November 27 and admitted her marriage.

The apex court ruled that the high court should not have annulled the marriage.

It was on May 24, 2017 that the high court cancelled the marriage of Hadiya and Sheffin.

Shafin Jahan, Hadiya's husband, challenged the annulment of the marriage in the Supreme Court.

The apex court said that it arrived at the decision after speaking to Hadiya, who had said she had willingly entered into the marriage with Shafin, Bar & Bench tweeted. "The court has asked for the NIA probe to continue as the larger question we raised is that Shafin Jahan is a terrorist", he told the media at his house near Kottayam in Kerala. Jahan moved the Supreme Court in August 2017, two months after the HC court order.

However, according to LiveLaw, the court also said that the National Investigative Agency (NIA) can continue its investigations into whether there was any criminality involved, but it shouldn't probe into the marriage.

She was not allowed to stay with her husband since, and was shuttled from guardian to guardian, until, more than one year later on March 8, the Supreme Court recognised that she had the right and the agency to choose her life partner.