Kerala High Court rejected a plea to cancel legal action against a man who claimed a Muslim woman broke Sharia law by shaking hands with a man at a public gathering. The court defined the main problem: Can a third person claim that a Muslim girl has gone against religious beliefs if she shakes hands with an adult male, with both parties involved being okay with it?
Justice PV Kunhikrishnan, leading the court, declined to dismiss charges against the man accused of breaking Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 119(a) of the Kerala Police Act, emphasizing that “the Constitution outranks any religious belief”.
The plaintiff had alleged that a Muslim woman, the second respondent, broke Sharia law and engaged in adultery by the act of shaking hands with someone from Kerala. Dr. TM Thomas Isaac, who was previously the finance minister, spoke at a public event.
The event took place when the plaintiff, a law student in her second year, engaged in a interactive session with Dr. Isaac at her college. During the event, she greeted the minister with a handshake and accepted a gift. The media outlets recorded the handshake and aired it on multiple channels. Several days later, a Facebook post and a WhatsApp video, believed to be made and shared by the petitioner, accused the woman of violating Sharia law by touching a man who was unrelated to her. As per the complainant, the defamatory material caused shame for her and her family, resulting in the commencement of legal action against the accused.
Kerala High Court observed the cultural and religious significance of handshakes, recognizing that although handshakes are a customary way to show respect and professionalism, physical contact between unrelated individuals of the opposite gender is usually deemed haram in Islamic tradition. Nonetheless, the court stressed that one’s religious beliefs are individual and Islam, along with other faiths, doesn’t require individuals to do anything against their will.
Kerala High Court observed that one cannot force someone else to participate in their own religious rituals. Every individual in this country has the right to choose their own religious beliefs and practices, with all people having equal entitlement to freedom of conscience and the ability to freely observe and spread their religion. Promoting religion does not entail forcing religious practices onto others. Each individual is entitled to openly adhere to and engage in their chosen religion.
By mentioning Quranic verses like Surah Al-Kafirun (109:6) and Surah Al-Baqarah (2:256), the court emphasized that religion is a personal decision, as stated “For you is your religion, and for me is my religion” and “There is no compulsion in religion.” The court was curious why the petitioner, who was unrelated, felt the need to enforce his view of religious beliefs on the second respondent, especially since she had willingly participated in the handshake.
Kerala High Court also highlighted the importance of society safeguarding a woman’s personal choices, stating that the Constitution holds the highest authority and cannot be disregarded by any religious belief. It is claimed that the video was shared and it showed the sequence of her handshake. A courageous young Muslim girl steps up and claims that it infringes on her personal religious freedom. During these circumstances, her interests will be safeguarded by our constitution. Additionally, the court declared that it is the responsibility of the community to assist her.
Kerala High Court determined that there was no misuse of legal process and declined to use its exceptional power to stop the legal proceedings. The court decided that there should be a trial to establish if the petitioner’s conduct fell under Section 153 IPC and Section 119(a) of the Kerala Police Act.
Kerala High Court commented that the trial court would base the case decision on its merits. If the accuser is found to be innocent, he can be cleared through proper legal procedures. In doing so, the court rejected the petition and instructed the trial court to expedite the case in compliance with the law.