Can courts annul marriage between two consenting adults?

In the recent Hadiya case, when Kerela High court annuled marriage between Hadiya and her muslim husband, a burning issue has re-emerged whether courts can annul marriage between two consenting adult. It is the same question that has been aptly raised by Supreme court, when the high court decision was challenged by Hadiya in the latter. 

What are the factors which should be taken into consideration, while answering the above question? The question is primarily a conflict between the right to life of a person (Hadiya in this case) and some malign intentions behind such inter-religion marriages. Such marriages, more recently in Kerela, have seen indoctrination. The women are forced into sex slaves. Hadiya's father is worried about the same. He worries that, this marriage is a hoax. Later his daughter will be forced into sex slave into the hands of jihadis in middle east. The concern is valid. Any father would worry about his daughter. And that too, when many such cases have emerged in Kerela before his eyes. In that case, how can a father allow his daughter to go into lion's den?

However, Supreme court has not given due consideration to a father's appeal. After high court quashed their marriage, it has raised another question, whether courts can annul marriage between two consenting adults. It is also right in its intent. The courts in India, do not follow due process of law. The law which confirms inter-religious marriage is Special Marriage Act. And, marriages carried under this law, can not be annulled on the premonition that, it will eventually turn into a sham marriage. The courts can not decide the case on the basis of their wisdom. Just because we are not American form of democracy where, the judiciary is supreme, an they follow due process of law. We, at India, follow procedure established by law. 

There are numerous evidences from the past, where due process of law have never been followed. And we can not. Hindu Marriage Act 1955 offers for solemnisation-cum-registration for the couple. Despite this law, the framers of law, were aware that, in case of husband's death, the widow will be forced into Sati. Or may be, the widow will accept Sati, by her own will. But such pratice could not be stopped until Sati (Prevention ) Act 1987 was framed. So, any ill-practice can be countered only by bringing a new law. The wisdom does not work by its own, the procedure established by law has to be followed.

Same is the case here. The wisdom that marriage between a Hindu Women and Muslim women, will lead to religion change, and will finally throw her into sex slave, can not be countered by existing laws. A new law has to be framed. 

The democarcy should not hesitate in bringing new laws and regulations. More are the rules and regulation, better is the governance. In Delhi Sultanate period, this was called Al-Qanuni, during Turkinsh rules and Khilji period. People praised their rule, because the governance was good. 

We have moved ahead only 500 years from the Sultanate period. But the laws of governance remains same. More is the rules and regulation, better is governance. Then, there will be little ambiguity in deciding: whether courts can annul marriage between two consulting adults.