Bride Says Interfaith Marriage Not Under Duress; HC Closes Habeas Plea
It was alleged that after the marriage was disclosed, her mother and other family members opposed the union and caused her detention.
Hyderabad: A two judge panel of the Telangana High Court disposed of a habeas corpus plea alleging illegal confinement of a woman by her own family following her marriage to a Muslim man. The panel comprising Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice Gadi Praveen Kumar was dealing with a writ plea filed by a petitioner stating that his wife, a 20-year-old BTech student, converted to Islam on March 13 and married him on March 14. It was alleged that after the marriage was disclosed, her mother and other family members opposed the union and caused her detention.
The detenue was produced before the court, and she submitted that members of her family, including her mother and aunt, kidnapped her and detained her for about 20 days in Ahmedabad. She stated that threats were issued to her and her husband on account of the interfaith marriage. Senior counsel J. Prabhakar, appearing for the mother submitted that the marriage may not be voluntary and sought time for the detenue to return and make renewed submissions, after she gets some time to think. The panel rejected the submission and observed that a 20-year-old woman was an adult and was free to marry, and that her statement before the court established voluntary nature. Recording these developments, the panel opined that the writ court cannot go beyond its jurisdiction in a habeas corpus plea once the detenue is produced before it. Accordingly, the panel disposed of the petition.
Pre-arrest bail sought in sex test case
Justice N. Tukaramji of the Telangana High Court heard a plea seeking anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged illegal abortion and violations under medical laws. The criminal petition was filed by Pidamrthi Shobha, registered at Suryapet II Town police station invoking provisions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, and the PCPNDT Act, 1994.The prosecution case pertained to allegations involving causing death in the course of a medical procedure, absence of valid consent, unlawful abortion, and prohibited sex determination practices under the relevant medical laws. Counsel for the petitioner argued that she was merely working as a receptionist and had no direct role in the alleged offences. It was further contended that petitioner is a student engaged in employment. The public prosecutor contended that the investigation is still pending. Taking note of the submissions of the petitioner counsel, the judge posted the matter for further hearing.