The Kerala High Court dismissed a petition to quash criminal proceedings against a man accused of targeting a Muslim woman for shaking hands with a man at a public event. The court affirmed that personal religious practices are subjective and must align with constitutional rights, emphasizing individual freedom and the personal nature of religious beliefs.
Kerala: The Kerala High Court has recently dismissed a petition aimed at quashing criminal proceedings against a man who accused a Muslim woman of violating Shariat law by shaking hands with an adult male at a public event. The court’s decision highlights the ongoing debate surrounding cultural practices and religious laws in contemporary society. This case has sparked discussions about personal interactions and the interpretation of Shariat law, raising questions about how traditional values intersect with modern social norms.
The court framed the key issue,
“If a Muslim girl gives a handshake to an adult male, and the girl who is giving the handshake and the adult who is accepting the handshake have no problem, can a third person can say that the Muslim girl violated religious beliefs?”
The Kerala High Court, under the leadership of Justice PV Kunhikrishnan, has dismissed a petition seeking to quash criminal proceedings against a man accused of violating Section 153 (provocation with intent to cause a riot) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 119(a) of the Kerala Police Act, which addresses punishments for atrocities against women. In a landmark ruling, the court asserted that “no religious belief is above the Constitution and the Constitution is supreme.”
Read Also: “Hindu-Muslim Union under Special Marriage Act Invalid in Muslim Law”: MP High Court
At the heart of this case lies an incident involving a Muslim woman, identified as the second respondent, who was accused of violating Shariat law and committing adultery after shaking hands with Kerala’s former finance minister, Dr. TM Thomas Isaac, during a public event. The incident unfolded when the complainant, a second-year law student, participated in an interactive session with Dr. Isaac at her college and shook hands with him while receiving a gift. This moment was captured by media outlets and widely broadcasted.
In the days following the event, a Facebook post and a WhatsApp video—allegedly created and circulated by the petitioner—accused the woman of breaching Shariat law by touching a man outside of her family. The complainant contended that this defamatory content caused disgrace to her and her family, prompting the initiation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner.
The court thoughtfully examined the cultural and religious implications of handshakes, recognizing that while “shaking hands” is traditionally a gesture of respect and professionalism, it may be viewed differently in Islamic practice, where physical contact between unrelated members of the opposite sex is generally considered haram (forbidden).
However, the court emphasized that religious beliefs are inherently personal and that Islam, like all religions, does not impose obligations on individuals.
The court stated,
“One cannot compel another to follow his religious practice.”
It reiterated that the freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion are fundamental rights for all citizens. Citing Quranic verses like Surah Al-Kafirun (109:6)—“For you is your religion, and for me is my religion”—and Surah Al-Baqarah (2:256)—“There is no compulsion in religion”—the court reinforced that religious practices should be a matter of personal choice. It questioned the petitioner’s motivation in attempting to impose his interpretation of religious principles on the second respondent, especially since she voluntarily engaged in the handshake.
Read Also: [Gyanvapi Case] Muslim Party Presents Arguments, Court Sets Next Hearing for October 10
Moreover, the court affirmed the Constitution’s supremacy, underscoring the societal responsibility to safeguard the personal choices of individuals.
The court noted,
“It is alleged that the video is circulated and the said sequence of her handshake was also displayed in the video. A young brave Muslim girl comes forward and says that it violates her personal freedom of religious belief. In such situations, our constitution will protect her interest. Moreover, it is the duty of society to support her.”
Ultimately, the court concluded that there was no abuse of legal process in this matter and opted not to invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction to quash the proceedings. It ruled that the case should proceed to trial to ascertain whether the petitioner’s actions constituted offenses under Section 153 IPC and Section 119(a) of the Kerala Police Act.
The high court stated that the trial court would evaluate the case on its merits. If the petitioner is found innocent, he can be acquitted following the due legal process. With this ruling, the court dismissed the petition and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings in accordance with the law.