It was nothing short of a reprimand the Supreme Court administered to “big government” in general, and the National Investigation Agency in particular when directing that body to discontinue its probe into the marriage aspect of the “Hadiya case”.

Other angles of the alleged “love jihad” could certainly be investigated ruled a Bench headed by the Chief Justice, but a consensual arrangement between two adults must remain a personal matter, regardless of religious, caste or other considerations, the court affirmed.

It added that it would also review the Kerala High Court’s annulment of that marriage between a Hindu woman and a Muslim man. The court was acting on a plea from Hadiya’s huband Shafin Jahan, and rejected the plea of the NIA that the matter was sub judice.

In upholding the right of Hadiya (who embraced Islam when marrying Jahan) to chose her own partner a powerful message on individual freedoms was also delivered, as the court rejected the arguments from her father that she had been lured into marriage on dubious pretensions.

The NIA has cut a sorry figure. It ought to have dropped the marriage-angle probe on its own once Hadiya made a rare personal appearance in the apex court and averred before it that she had married Jahan of her own free will.

By declining to accept her position the NIA invited the admonition from Chief Justice Dipak Misra that, “Let them (NIA) investigate him (Jahan). But you cannot question the marriage. Only she (Hadiya) has the right to question her marriage”.

In the long term that snub from the highest judicial authority should serve as a corrective to all police agencies to confine themselves to functioning within a legitimate framework and guard against being swayed by public sentiment or religious/communal influences.

The concept of “love jihad” is questionable to start with, and an inter-faith marriage cannot be slammed by mere allegations of it being the manipulated machinations of terrorist outfits, the IS in particular.

The misleading of young people into linking up with those outfits is one thing, prying into a consensual relationship between two adults is something else. Parents/relatives of one party in a mixed marriage have to be prevented from raising false bogeys like terrorism or “love jihad” ~ that is one upshot of the apex court’s directive.

The NIA has, unwittingly perhaps, acquired an anti-Muslim reputation, and like the CBI no longer enjoys apolitical credibility. True that many of the terrorist acts it has been required to probe do have a Muslim dimension, all the more reason for top officials to guard against creating the wrong impression.

Without saying that specifically, the Supreme Court order to drop probing Hadiya’s marriage could help the NIA re-rail itself, redeem the image of a professional outfit, critical in the battle against terrorism of all colours.