Supreme Court Upholds Adult Woman’s Right to Marry, Sets Aside Kerala High Court’s Nullification of Interfaith Marriage in Habeas Corpus Case

SC Emphasizes Constitutional Liberties, Rejects Parens Patriae Doctrine Application for Competent Adult, and Criticizes Judicial Overreach in Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M.

In a landmark judgment delivered on April 9, 2018, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India, comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, emphatically restored the personal liberty of a major woman, Hadiya (also known as Akhila), upholding her right to marry a man of her choice despite opposition from her father and the Kerala High Court’s annulment of the marriage.

The case arose from a habeas corpus petition filed by Hadiya’s father, Asokan K.M., alleging illegal confinement and forced conversion of his daughter, who had embraced Islam and married Shafin Jahan. The Kerala High Court exercised parens patriae jurisdiction, declaring the marriage null and void on grounds of Hadiya’s “vulnerability” and “weakness,” and ordered her return to parental custody. The High Court further imposed restrictions on her liberty, including prohibiting mobile phone use and limiting visitors, and directed comprehensive investigations into the marriage and associated persons.

Rejecting the High Court’s approach, the Supreme Court held that Hadiya, being a competent adult of 24 years, had an unequivocal right under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution to make decisions about her faith and choice of partner. The Court underscored that the writ of habeas corpus is designed solely to secure release from illegal confinement and does not empower courts to annul marriages or dictate personal decisions of adults.

The apex court elaborated that the doctrine of parens patriae—where the State acts as guardian for those unable to care for themselves—is applicable only in exceptional circumstances such as minors or persons with mental incapacity. It stressed that invoking this doctrine to annul a major’s marriage infringes on constitutional freedoms and autonomy.

Justice Chandrachud, concurring with the majority, expressed deep concern over the grievous miscarriage of justice caused by the High Court’s paternalistic interference in Hadiya’s life, which resulted in months of custody against her will. The Supreme Court emphasized that constitutional courts must uphold individual rights without succumbing to societal or parental pressures.

The judgment reaffirmed the sanctity of personal liberty, autonomy in matters of faith and marriage, and the right to privacy as guaranteed by the Constitution. It clarified that concerns about criminal investigations or allegations of extremism must be handled by the relevant authorities within their legal bounds, without impinging on fundamental rights.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the Kerala High Court’s judgment, restored Hadiya’s liberty, and allowed her to pursue her studies and live according to her own choices. It permitted ongoing criminal investigations by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) but explicitly prohibited interference with the marital status of the couple.

This judgment is a significant reaffirmation of the constitutional values of liberty, dignity, and the right of adults to make independent choices free from coercion or unwarranted State interference, especially in the sensitive areas of religion and marriage.

Statutory provisions

Constitution of India, 1950 Articles 19, 21, 136, 226; Muslim Personal Law (applicable as per facts); Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 16

Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M. (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 1002324