This comes as the Court dismissed a petition filed by Abdul Noushad of Kottakkal, who has been accused of criticising a Muslim girl for shaking hands with former Finance Minister Thomas Issac at a public event.
- Petition dismissed against woman shaking hands with ex-minister
- Court says shaking hands is a traditional gesture
- Video circulated accusing woman of violating Shariat Law
The Kerala High Court has refused to quash the proceedings against a man who made allegations against a Muslim girl that she committed adultery and violated Shariat Law by shaking hands with the former Finance Minister of Kerala, observing that no religious belief stands above the Constitution.
The ruling came by a single-judge bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan, who dismissed a petition filed by Abdul Noushad of Kottakkal, accused of criticising the Muslim girl for shaking hands with former Finance Minister Thomas Issac at a public event.
Justice P V Kunhikrishnan noted that "shaking hands" is a traditional gesture that symbolises greeting, respect, courtesy, agreement, deal, friendship, solidarity, etc
The woman complainant accused Abdul Noushad of circulating a video through WhatsApp that contained a speech claiming that she had violated Shariat Law by shaking hands with a man. According to the video, the act was considered adultery because she, as a woman, had touched another man.
The incident occurred when the woman, a second-year law student at Markaz Law College, participated in an interactive session with former Finance Minister Thomas Isaac, during which students received gifts for asking questions. After accepting the gifts, they shook hands with Isaac. However, the petitioner shared a video alleging that the woman had violated Shariat Law, leading to police charges against him under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 119(a) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011.
The woman stated that the video brought disgrace to both her and her family. The court observed that a courageous Muslim woman had come forward, asserting that the video's distribution infringed upon her freedom of religious belief.
"In such situations, our Constitution will protect her interests. Moreover, society has to support her," Justice Kunhikrishnan said.
"No religious belief is above the Constitution. The Constitution is supreme," he added.
Emphasising the importance of personal choice in religious practice, the court also stated that "there is no compulsion in religion, especially in Islam".
In the ruling, the court highlighted that one individual cannot force another to adhere to their religious beliefs, reinforcing the idea that religious practice is a personal decision for every citizen. The court asserted, "The woman in the case has a right to follow a religious practice in her own way," stressing that no one should impose their beliefs on others.
No comments:
Post a Comment