https://x.com/i/status/2044824394833477904
@swati_gs
Comparison of Nashik TCS conversion racket case and Kerala’s Akhila/Hadiya case:
1. Nashik case reached police in February when parents of a 20-something woman said she had started wearing dupatta in hijab style and keeping roza
2. Akhila, a college student from Kerala, started displaying similar habits under influence of her Muslim hostel mates. She even refused to attend her grandfather’s funeral in 2015, probably brainwashed against cremation
3. In Nashik case, police planted undercover personnel as staff in TCS office. A month later, the woman agreed to file case against Mohd Danish, a married man with a son, of rape and pressure to convert.
This is what happened in Akhila’s case:
4 Akhila left her parents’ house and started living with Zainaba, a leader of Popular Front of India - which has later banned for Jihadi terrorism
5. Akhila’s father Ashokan reported her missing and filed a habeas corpus petition. Police traced her and found she had formally converted to Islam, adopted the name Hadiya and was living at an Islamic centre. High Court allowed her to live this way as she was 18+
6. After some time when she was again unreachable, Ashokan filed another habeas corpus petition, this time expressing fear that Akhila might be in Syria as she had once said that she wanted to “graze goats in Syria”
7. Given that many had left Kerala to join ISIS, High Court now took it seriously and ordered Akhila/Hadiya to be taken out of the Islamic centre and kept in a govt hostel to complete her homeopathy course. Court also asked from where was she getting the funds from to live on her own
8. Two days later, in Dec 2016, she appeared in court with a man named Shafi Jahan, saying they had had nikah and so we wanted to live with him. Judges were surprised
9. Police told court that Shafin Jahan is a member of PFI, had three criminal cases against him including for a fraudulently obtained passport, and his social media posts suggested ‘sympathy for Jihad’. NIA further revealed that Shafin was in touch with two charge-sheeted accused in an ISIS module case
10. HC found the marriage to be a sham and annulled it, giving custody of Akhila/Hadiya to Ashokan, saying she did not “have an independent mind” and could not be relied upon
11. Islamists and their allies then rn a campaign on why an adult woman’s right to marry a man of her choice was not honoured
12. Shafi filed a case in Supreme Court asking for right to live with his ‘wife’. SC restored the marriage
13. Soon after SC order, Akhila/Hadiya and Shafin Jahan divorced - proving HC’s observation to be right that it was a sham marriage
14. Two years ago, when Akhila was again unreachable to her family, Ashokan filed another habeas corpus plea in high court. Her lawyer told the court she had done another nikah
