LONDON/JAIPUR:

In a new twist to the Liz Hurley-Arun Nayar wedding row, Arun’s father Vinod Nayar is reported to be willing to testify against the couple in a legal case that alleges their marriage in Rajasthan broke Hindu customs.

Many British Asians in London likened the post-marriage developments to popular Indian television serials — only in this case the ‘villain’ is seen to be Liz’s father-in-law.

Vinod had accused Liz of pandering to commercial interests of Hello! magazine, which had signed a £2 million deal with the couple for exclusive access to the March wedding. The deal is likely to be used as evidence against the couple.

The Daily Mail quoted prosecuting lawyer HM Saraswat as saying on April 10, “An arrest warrant could be issued for Arun and Liz as soon as the prosecution has made its case — either because they are summoned to give evidence or they have been found guilty.

“He (Vinod) contacted me and wants to get some help regarding this case. He wants to disclose some important facts. Vinod told me that when Arun and Liz came to the marriage mandap (marriage place), Arun left his footwear outside the mandap but Liz refused to remove her footwear. When we worship we must remove our shoes because we pray to god and at that time shoes should be removed. Our intention is to prove that the procedures adopted by both the accused for their marriage is against our Hindu rites. We have our own religious beliefs, including that the bride and bridegroom must behave soberly, and in this case they have both taken drinks. Pictures of them kissing in Hello! magazine is against our culture also. We are using the Hello! pictures to prove our case.”

The case is reported to be based on section 295 A of the Indian Penal code, which deals with the intention to outrage the feelings of Hindus by insulting their religious and ritualistic beliefs.

Saraswat separately said from Jodhpur that Vinod could not appear in the Jodhpur court but would send his written statement instead.

It is also alleged that Liz showed off excess flesh with her choice of attire.

Saraswat added, “In our religion the bride must wear the proper dress covering her body. In this case Liz shows her body, which is against our culture and against our beliefs.” — HNS