<p class="title">The Supreme Court today refused to accord urgent hearing on a plea filed by the father of a Kerala-based woman, who converted to Islam before marrying a Muslim man, that interaction with the woman be conducted in- camera.</p>.<p class="bodytext">A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud said that it will deal with this plea on November 27 itself when the woman would be brought before it for interaction.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The counsel for Ashokan K M, the father of the woman, sought an urgent hearing on his plea saying that it would become infructuous if the earlier order mandating open court interaction is not modified.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The apex court had on October 30 directed that the woman be produced before it on November 27 for an interaction in open court.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Asokan referred to the communally sensitive nature of the case and sought in-camera interaction on some grounds including that radical elements could jeopardise the safety and privacy of his daughter and the family.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The top court had on August 16 said it would speak to the woman in-camera before taking a final decision on the matter. It has later modified the order saying "We may further add that this court shall speak to her not in camera but in open court."</p>.<p class="bodytext">The apex court had earlier observed that the free consent of a major to marriage has to be ascertained amid an assertion by National Investigation Agency (NIA) that an indoctrinated person may be incapable of giving free consent to marriage.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The NIA had referred to "psychological kidnapping" and said that an indoctrinated person may be incapable of giving free consent.</p>.<p class="bodytext">It had also alleged that there was a "well-oiled machinery working in Kerala" indulging in indoctrination and radicalisation and 89 such cases have been reported.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The NIA had claimed that this was a case in which the woman was indoctrinated and hence the court could invoke parental authority even if she was a major.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The counsel for her father had earlier claimed that Shafin Jahan, the alleged husband of the woman, was a radicalised man and had links with persons who used to recruit for ISIS.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The woman, a Hindu, had converted to Islam and later married Jahan. It was alleged that the woman was recruited by Islamic State's mission in Syria and Jahan was only a stooge.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Jahan had on September 20 approached the apex court seeking recall of its August 16 order directing the NIA to investigate the controversial case of conversion and marriage of a Hindu woman with him.</p>.<p class="bodytext">He had moved the top court after the Kerala High Court had annulled his marriage, saying it was an insult to the independence of women in the country. </p>
<p class="title">The Supreme Court today refused to accord urgent hearing on a plea filed by the father of a Kerala-based woman, who converted to Islam before marrying a Muslim man, that interaction with the woman be conducted in- camera.</p>.<p class="bodytext">A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud said that it will deal with this plea on November 27 itself when the woman would be brought before it for interaction.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The counsel for Ashokan K M, the father of the woman, sought an urgent hearing on his plea saying that it would become infructuous if the earlier order mandating open court interaction is not modified.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The apex court had on October 30 directed that the woman be produced before it on November 27 for an interaction in open court.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Asokan referred to the communally sensitive nature of the case and sought in-camera interaction on some grounds including that radical elements could jeopardise the safety and privacy of his daughter and the family.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The top court had on August 16 said it would speak to the woman in-camera before taking a final decision on the matter. It has later modified the order saying "We may further add that this court shall speak to her not in camera but in open court."</p>.<p class="bodytext">The apex court had earlier observed that the free consent of a major to marriage has to be ascertained amid an assertion by National Investigation Agency (NIA) that an indoctrinated person may be incapable of giving free consent to marriage.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The NIA had referred to "psychological kidnapping" and said that an indoctrinated person may be incapable of giving free consent.</p>.<p class="bodytext">It had also alleged that there was a "well-oiled machinery working in Kerala" indulging in indoctrination and radicalisation and 89 such cases have been reported.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The NIA had claimed that this was a case in which the woman was indoctrinated and hence the court could invoke parental authority even if she was a major.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The counsel for her father had earlier claimed that Shafin Jahan, the alleged husband of the woman, was a radicalised man and had links with persons who used to recruit for ISIS.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The woman, a Hindu, had converted to Islam and later married Jahan. It was alleged that the woman was recruited by Islamic State's mission in Syria and Jahan was only a stooge.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Jahan had on September 20 approached the apex court seeking recall of its August 16 order directing the NIA to investigate the controversial case of conversion and marriage of a Hindu woman with him.</p>.<p class="bodytext">He had moved the top court after the Kerala High Court had annulled his marriage, saying it was an insult to the independence of women in the country. </p>