Rattibha

#HijabCase Hearing Day 3 : Supreme Court to continue hearing the #Hijab case today.
A bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia to hear the matter.
#SupremeCourt

Report of day 1 of hearing can be read here:
Hijab Case : Can Religious Clothing Be Worn In A Govt Institution In A Secular Country? Supreme Court Asks During Hearing [Day 1]
#SupremeCourt #Hijab
livelaw.in

www.livelaw.in

Report of day 2 of the hearing case be read here :
Hijab Case| Secularism Doesn't Mean Students Of Only One Faith Won't Display Religion : Devadatt Kamat Before Supreme Court [Day 2]
#Hijab #SupremeCourt
livelaw.in

www.livelaw.in

Also from Day 2 :
Right To Dress Includes Right To Undress Too?Justice Hemant Gupta Asks In Hijab Case Hearing
#Hijab #SupremeCourt
livelaw.in

www.livelaw.in

Also from Day 2 :
Rudraksha Or Cross Aren't Comparable To Hijab As They Are Worn Inside Dress, Says Justice Hemant Gupta During Hearing
#Hijab #SupremeCourt
livelaw.in

www.livelaw.in

The #HijabCase hearing is expected to start at 11.30 AM today. It might start earlier if the bench finishes the other cases before 11.30.
Follow this thread for live-updates.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Bench takes the #Hijab matter.
Senior Adv Devadatt Kamat continuing the submissions
#SupremeCourt

Kamat : Your lordships had asked what was the provision in the Constitution provision in South African constitution.
Kamat pointing out the provisin.
#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Kamat : Your lordships were right, South Africa is much more diverse, and the scope of protection is wider.
#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Kamat : Justice Dhulia had pointed out decisions in Continental Courts, it was one judgment in Austria..there was head scarf ban targeted at one community which was held unconstitutional.
#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Kamat referring to Austrian decision - students belonging to Islamic faith said it was part of their decision.
#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Kamat quoting from Austrian judgment : "Selective ban which forbids Islamic girls from wearing headscarf may have adverse effect on the inclusion of female students concerned and making access to education more difficult for Muslim girls and marginalizes them"
#Hijab

Kamat : State argues that if they come in head scarf, other people will get offended. That can be no reason to ban it.
#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Kamat : Just to recap what my argument on Article 25 is going to be. 25 has two parts. 25(1) and 25(2). 25(1) has 3 sets of restrictions - public order, morality and health and other provisions of fundamental rights chapter.
#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Kamat : Restriction on #hijab in school, State has not justified either on public order or morality or health. So this GO cannot be a valid restriction for the purposes of first part of Article 25.
#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Dhulia : This argument is available to you if you are taking it as a religious practice, but yesterday you said you are not taking it?
Kamat : No, I will make it clear. This right comes from 19 and also 25.
#Hijab

Kamat : Every religious practice may not be essential, but that does not mean State can keep restricting it as long as it does not fall foul of public order, morality or health.
#Hijab

Kamat : For example, when I wear a namam, Senior Advocate K Parasaran, he is a father like figure for us, he wears namam. Does it affect discipline or decorum in Court?
#Hijab

Justice Gupta : You can't compare, dress in court. Last day, Mr.Dhawan mentioned pagadi. It might be an essential dress. In Rajasthan people wear pagadi. In Gujarat too.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : I can wear head gear, kara, as part of my religious belief. It may not be a core religious practice. But as long as it does not affect public order, health or morality, it can be allowed.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Your lordships know the Anand Margis case, where Tandav dance was prohibited.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Gupta : You wearing a hijab in street may not offend anyone. But when you wear a hijab in a school, the question is what kind of public order the school wants to maintain.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : School can't take that ground of public order. If I wear a head gear and someone gets offended and makes an issue and shouts slogans, police can't say I can't wear it. That will be hecklers veto. It is on this basis that the ban was imposed.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Last day the AG said the GO was issued after some students demanded to wear saffron shawls and the ban was imposed in that context. Can hecklers veto be allowed?
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : You(State) can't take a facile ground that public order will be violated. It is your duty to ensure an atmosphere of public order so that I can exercise my rights freely.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat referring to judgments against Hecklers Veto. Judgment rendered in the case of mob protesting against film screening. Court held once an expert body (CBFC) has certified the film, mob can't stop it and State has to protect the exhibition.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat referring a judgment delivered in 2019 against shadow ban of a film in West Bengal. Points out Justice Gupta was also part of the bench.
Kamat : My lord Justice Gupta sitting with Justice Chandrachud.
Judgment here:
livelaw.in

www.livelaw.in

Justice Gupta : This was a case where a film was not permitted to be screened due to apprehension of breach of peace.
Kamat : That is my submission.
Justice Gupta : But you are still not answering our question. Public order when...
Kamat : Im coming to that.

Justice Gupta : There are issues where there are disputes within religious precincts itself. Public order is a state responsibility at all places. Sometimes even in court.
Kamat : State's objection was somebody is creating the issue because students are wearing headscarf.

Kamat : Hecklers Veto principle has been adopted by your lordships.
Justice Gupta : Yes we have noted.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Gupta : Mr Kamat don't wase time on public order.
Kamat : But the GO mentions public order. It is there. I am not making submissions in the air.
Justice Dhulia : You read the GO and tell subsequently what was held by the Court.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : State says wearing of headscarf violates public order.
Justice Gupta referring to GO : It is saying head scarf prohibition is not violating Article 25.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Public order ground is raised in the statement of objection.
Justice Dhulia : GO prescribes management commitees to ban hijab?
Kamat : It is not prescribing, it is saying commitees can decide.
J Dhuli : So they(committee) derive their power from the GO

Kamat : None of the grounds in Article 25 is made out in the first part of the GO.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : If I wear a headscarf, whose fundamental rights am I violating?
Justice Gupta : It is not the question of violating other's fundamental rights, the question is whether you have the fundamental right.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : If I want to wear a headscarf, I want to wear a namam or kara if it makes me feel better, your lordships will protect me. It is not the question of where is the right. It is the question of where is the restriction.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Whether the restriction on hijab can be traced to any of the grounds under Article 25. My submission is no.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Gupta asks if Kamat is going to address on all issues.
Kamat says he is not arguing on Essential Religious Practice and Quranic injunctions and other lawyers will.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat comes to second part of Article 25- State can make a law for social reform in a religion.
Kamat - State is pitching on Education Act.

Kamat. : The question which arises for your lordships is which is this great law which provides for social reform. None. Look at the preamble of Education Act, Section 7, Rule 11, none of the framers of the law ever thought this will be put to restrict right under Art 25

Kamat : Any restriction on right must be direct and proximate, not indirect or inferential.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : The High Court says the Act is "as clear as Gangetic waters". I submit it is totally muddied.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : According to the State, the Preamble(to the Education Act) is a restriction.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : High Court says the objective of promoting secular outlook mentioned in the Preamble to the Act is a restriction. I am at pains to understand how can this be a restriction.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Then Section 7 of the Act. A scheme to promote harmony which the State can make under Section 7 is construed as a restriction on wearing hijab. #Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : HC refers to the power of the State to frame a scheme to restrict practices derogatory to women. Where does it say hijab is derogatory to women?
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat referring to a judgment to say restriction on fundamental right on ground of public order must have direct and proximate link with public order and cannot be indirect or inferential.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Every restriction must be direct and proximate. Otherwise State can infer restrictions which the High Court has approved in this case.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Whether uniformity in public space is a ground to restrict Article 25? Whether a Muslim girl wearing a head scarf is an affront to discipline? Article 25 does not recognize this ground of uniformity or discipline.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : The argument of the State is I wear hijab, other students will wear orange shawl. Wearing of orange shawl is not a genuine religious belief. It is a belligerent display of religion, that if you wear this, I will wear this.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Article 25 only protects innocent bonafide practice of religion. Wearing a namam, yes, wearing a hijab yes. Wearing of orange shawl is not a bona fide practice.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : These are constitutional issues which your lordships may have to consider under Article 145(3). There is no direct judgment. There are issues like what is religion, what is conscience, difference between freedom of religion and conscience.

Kamat : High Court says I have not said how I have developed the conscience to wear hijab. I have averred in the petition. High Court says freedom of conscience is distinct with religion and quotes Dr.Ambedkar in CAD. Totally wrong.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : I have placed the entire Constituent Assembly Debates. There is not a single word by Dr.Ambedkar on distinction between conscience and religion. He may have said elsewhere but not in CAD.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Hindu religion provides for 16 forms of puja. Today somebody lights a diya, is it freedom of religion or conscience.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Kamat : People carry photos of Rama or Krishna. I do. It gives a sense of confidence. Is it religion or concscience? It is not something ordained in the scriptures.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : High Court has gone into a dangerous territory of separating conscience from religion. We have gone beyond the stage of seeing rights separately. The law has developed that all rights are interlinked.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Every member in the Constituent Assembly Debate may have said something. We can't say everything said in CAD as gospel truth. What Dr.Ambedkar said may have somer relevance .
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : Ghanshyam Upadhyay is the only member who spoke of conscience. He says nothing definite. High Court says CAD has discussed.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : The only other place where conscience is discussed is on the draft Article of present day Article 32.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : CAD does not take anywhere to the conclusion that religion and conscience is different.
Justice Dhulia : There may be a person who may not believe in any religion. What about him?

Kamat : He has right to conscience. But a person may follow some diktats of religion out of belief and some other diktats out of conscience.
Kamat refers to UN docs stating interlink between religion and conscience.
#Hijab

Justice Gupta : Mr.Kamat, I think you have exceeded your time limit.
Kamat : I will finish in 15 minutes.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Kamat : High Court fell into the Constitutional error of first going to decide if Hijab is an essential practice, without deciding if GO can be a restriction.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Dhulia : According to you, essential religious practice is not to be seen?
Kamat : I say at the second stage. First see if there is a valid constitutional restriction, then only the question of ERP arises.
#Hijab

Kamat says there is a divergence of views between Karnataka, Kerala and Madras High Court judgments on whether hijab is an essential religous practice.
Kamat : Madras and Kerala have held it is essential, Karnataka has differed. Your lordships may have to settle it.
#Hijab

Kamat cites the issues framed by the larger bench in Sabarimala review case.
#Hijab
livelaw.in

www.livelaw.in

Kamat : Last limb of the argument is on administrative law. On the face of it, the GO cannot stand.
Justice Gupta : We have seen it.
Kamat : I am not on the points already canvassed
#Hijab

Kamat : My question is whether the GO suffers from complete non-application of mind and wheher High Court could have supplied reasons for the GO?
#Hijab

Kamat : AG rightly conceded that none of the judgments mentioned in the GO prohibited hijab. But the State says as per aforementioned judmgents, ban of hijab is not violaitng Article 25. That is complete non-application of mind. Rightly conceded by the AG.

Kamat : But the High Court says reasons do not matter as long as power to issue GO is there. It is settled law Court cannot supplant reasons. And High Court has done so in this case.
#Hijab

Kamat : According to me, the power cannot be delegated to the College Development Committe. Who is the CDC, it has MLA, parents. And the power cannot be delegated to a non-State actor. I will demonstrate that CDC is a non-State actor.
#Hijab #Karnataka

Kamat : President of CDC is an MLA. If they are placed under the custody of the MLA, kindly see the repercussions.
Justice Gupta : They are representatives of the people.
Kamat : MLA is not an authority subordinate to State Govt. This can't be delegated to the MLA.
#Hijab

Kamat : Can they decide issues of public order, morality etc under Article 25? See the enormity.

Kamat : On plain administrative law principles, this is a violation of Section..High Court says I have not challenged the circular (constituting CDC). I don't need to. Once you start investing in CDC state power, we can challenge. It is not required to be challenged in 2014.

Justice Gupta : Thank You Mr.Kamat.
Kamat : Kindly see my penultimate prayer. Article 145(3). It is mandatory to refer.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Devadatt Kamat concludes arguments.
#Hijab #SupremCourt

Justices Gupta and Dhulia are having a discussion.
#Hijab

Justice Gupta asks the name of the next lawyer.
"Nizam Pasha", lawyer replies.
Pasha : Kamat is a student of Hindu law, I am a student of Islamic law.
#Hijab

Pasha : The first question to be answered by your lordship is what is the test to be used for essential religious practice.
Refers to Shirur Matt case.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha quotes from Shirur Mutt : "The Attorney-General lays stress upon clause (2)(a) of the article and his contention is that all secular activities, which may be associated with religion but do not really constitute an essential part of it, are amenable to State regulation".

Pasha says the above argument was not accepted by the Court in Shirur Mutt. Quotes "The contention formulated in such broad terms cannot, we think, be supported".
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha quotes from Shirur Mutt : "what constitutes the essential part of a religion is primarily to be ascertained with reference to the doctrines of that religion itself".
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : The contention of Attorney General that only essential practices of religion were protected under Article 25 was rejected (in Shirur Mutt case).
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : After this, it was in the Durgah Committe judgment by 5-judges that the essentiality test was formulated.
J Gupta : Shirur Mutt was by how many judges.
Pasha : 7-judges.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : Law on essential practice which we are talking of today is merely by way of an obiter in the judgment of Justice Gajendragadkar.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Dhulia : Mr.Counsel, what is the argument you are trying to build up?
Pasha : The question whether all religious practice or only essential religious practice are protected is a question on which 7-judges, 5-judges and 3-judges have taken different views.
#hijab

Pasha : In Bijoe Emmanuel, 3-judges held any belief which is held conscientiously held is protected.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : So not just essential practices, but any practice which is conscientiously held is protected. So this put your lordships in a dilemma. There is variance between 7-judges and 5-judges and the 9-judges bench is now examining

Pasha : Before I read scriptures, I must tell your lordship the word of caution sounded by 5-judges in Babri Masjid judgment regarding reading of scriptures.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha says in Babri judgment did not enter into an area of theology and said the true test is to see if a true believer holds that belief. The Court must steer clear out of adopting one among the many interpretations of theological doctrines.

Pasha quotes from Babri judgment : "Our court is founded on Constitutional order and we must reject the attempt to lead the Court into interpretation of religious doctrines".
#hijab

Justice Gupta : There is a slight different...it was to explain the situation whether Ram Lalla was there that the observations were made.
Pasha : Law is laid down on the interpretation of religious scriptures.

Pasha : There are multiple sects and multiple views in religion and each individual's understanding of scripture must be protected.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : In Shayra Bano (triple talaq) case, the Court did not interpret scriptures. It was only the judgment of Justice Kurian Joseph which proceeded on scriptures. The majority judgment went by the statute.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Gupta : Alright, we will continue after lunch.
Hearing to commence at 2 PM.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Bench re-assembles. Hearing resumes. Nizam Pasha continuing the arguments.
Pasha referring to Mulla on Mohammedan Law.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : There are 3 sources of Mohammedan Law. Quran, Hadis(sayings and traditions of Prophet), Ijma, Qiyas.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : The learned judge of High Court starts with an unrelated phrase that nothing is compulsion in religion and uses it to hold #Hijab is not mandatory.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : The verse which means nobody can be compelled to convert has been used to hold Hijab is not mandatory.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Gupta : Mr.Pasha, we would like to know the verses which say hijab is necessary?
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha cites verses.
" The word used in Quran in Khimar. Though in Indian context hijab is used".
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha refers to SURAH AN-NUR AYAT 31 Verse 24. Cites the verse quoted in the High Court judgemnt.

Pasha : Some readers of Quran say it nowhere says it covers your head and cover your bosom.
Justice Dhulia : You take us through the parts of the judgment where it is discussed, it will be easier to understand.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : HC quoted the verse "let there be no compulsion.." and held hijab is not mandatory. It is a gross misunderstanding. Firts, the verse against compulsion was against forced conversion.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha tells the bench about mandatory practices of Islam - Namaz, Roza, Zakat, thouwheen (faith in one god) and hajj. These are colloquially regarded as the mandatory tenets of Islam.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : "Tauheed"(misspelt as thouwheen above) or Iman...translated loosely as faith.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha : What is written in Quran is part of the first tenent(faith in god). The other four are meaningless without the first. In the spirtual sense, belief in Quran being the word of Allah, over which a second opinion of human is impossible, is supreme.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Dhulia : Again you are taking us round and round, take us through the HC judgment.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha cites the next Sura mentioned in the HC judgment.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Gupta : You mentioned, Quran, Hadis...Suras fall in which place.
Pasha : Suras are chapters of Quran.
Justice Gupta : Sorry about my ignorance.
Pasha : It cannot be ordinarily expected to know about other religions.
#hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha explaining Jilbab and says it covers whole body, and is different from hijab as it covers only head and chest.
Jusice Gupta : How is it different from burqa?
Pasha : Burqa is a Persianised word of jilbab

Justice Gupta referring to Quran translation : What is the word OFT used after God?
Pasha : It is for often. In Quran, like Bible, old English is uses for translation. There will be words like Thine. The kind we use in pleadings with words like showeth

Pasha : Learned judges of HC has extracted a footnote from elsewhere and added to another verse to say this is not absolute.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha referring to footnote 3767 mentioned in the HC judgment and says it was the opinion of the translator and not the translation of the text. He adds the footnote is concerning the verse about "jilbab" and not the verse concerning "Hijab".
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : The author (Abdulla Yusuf Ali) is saying jilbab is not compulsory
Justice Dhulia : The scholar is saying regarding jilbab, God is forgiving, and it is not regarding Hijab. But the High Court has taken it as about Hijab?.
Pasha : That is right.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Gupta : Which is the verse dealing with Hijab?
Pasha : Sura 24.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha cites the following verse. Says the footnote about jilbab has been transposed to the verse about hijab by the High Court.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : Therefore, it is on a misreading of this footnote that the High Court concludes that wearing of Hijab is recommendatory.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : The High Court says Hijab is not mandatory due to absence of prescription of penance or penalty. That is a misunderstanding. There is no temporal punishment for a spiritual disobedience. Religion has spiritual implications for after life.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Justice Dhulia : But is it not a contradiction in terms, because. Quran says there is no compulsion in religion.
Pasha : These are spiritual acts for which punishment is in afterlife. There is no temporal punishment .
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Justice Gupta : You say there is no temporal punishment for not wearing hijab. Where do you get it?
Pasha : There is no pres cription in Quran. Even for violation of namaz, Roza, there is no temporal punishment.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : Quran is the word of God and belief in the word of God is the first precondition for being a Muslim.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : There are a couple of ther misquotations in the High Court judgment which I wish to point out.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : Nothing in the footnotes extracted by the High Court is contrary to the case I am making.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha referring to portions in the High Court judgment which says #Hijab is at best a cultural practice.
Pasha : This finding is not borne out by anything but it is the finding of the learned judges themselves.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : Opinions of commentators are cited, but even that does not support the conclusion, leave aside the verse.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha says the commentaries are cited by the High Court in the wrong context. Some commentaries were transposed to the context of #Hijab.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : To say with the passage of time the verse has lost meaning...we believe in the God who created the time. Quran is not chronologically arranged at the time it was revealed.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : For believing Muslims, Quran is perfect for all the times to come. So to say the verses have lost meaning with time is bordering on blasphemy.
Justice Dhulia : Don't go that far. Commentators are saying their opinon.
Pasha : Not commentators, learned judges are saying.

Justices Gupta and Dhulia having a discussion.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Justice Gupta : Give a short note kind of a thing, so that we can understand.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : When a believing girl believes her veil is better than world is told no to education with the veil, she is forced to choose between education and the veil, and this is violation of Article 19.
J Dhulia : That argument has already been made.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha referring to Hadis : When the Prophet is quoted as saying veil is more important, and when the Quran says follow the prophet, nothing more is required to show it is essential.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha says High Court questioned the translation placed by Muhammad Muhsin Khan, doubting his credentials.
"But the other side never disputed his credentials. This is something which found its way to the HC judgment on its own".
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : That way Abdulla Yusuf Ali (whose translation was relied on by the HC) was not even a Sunni.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha says High Court opined that whatever said in Quran cannot be mandatory and cited the example of triple talaq.
Pasha : Triple Talaq is not mentioned in Quran or even in Hadis. So this was an irrelevant comparsion.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Justice Gupta : Mr.Pasha, we are requesting you, you give a short note on whichever verses and authors you want to rely on for support
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha refers to Article 29(1) and says even as a cultural practice it is protected.
Pasha : Justice Gupta mentioned in morning wearing of turban is cultural. It is protected. Wearing of hijab, even if regarded as cultural, is protected.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Justice Dhulia : You can build an argument on this.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : If a Sikh has to wear a turban, and he is told not to come to school if he wears turban, it is violative.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Justice Gupta : The comparision with Sikh may not be proper. The 5 Ks of Sikh has been held to be mandatory. There are judgments. Carrying of kirpan is recognized by Constitution. So don't compare practices.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : Only Kirpan is mentioned in Constitution. Other Ks are not mentioned.
Justice Dhulia : There are judgments..of Justice Khehar I guess.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Justice Gupta : Morning Kamat mentioned Kara. Kara is one of the Ks. Kesh, Kanga..these are also Ks.
Pasha : Exact same analogy applies to Islam. These are fundamental tenets of Islam.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : I went to an all boys School, fortunately or unfortunately. And in my class, there were several Sikh boys who wore turban of the same colour of uniform. It has been established that it will not cause violation of discipline.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Justice Gupta : There was a case in Punjab. A college run by SGPC. The condition of admission was that anybody who won't follow tenets of Sikhism can't get. A girl was denied admission on ground she trimmed her eyebrows. and the matter is pending here.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Gupta : Please don't make any comparison with Sikhism. These are all practices well established, well engrained in the culture of the country.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : The example is immediate and proxime. The example of France..we are deluding ourselves.
Justice Dhulia : We are not going there. If we are going there, we are go nowhere.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha : We are deluding ourselves if we think we are like France.
Justice Gupta : We don't want to be at par with France or Austria. We are Indians and want to be in India.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

When Justice Gupta asked Pasha to not make comparison with Sikh practices.
Pasha: Islam is also there for 1400 years and the Hijab is also present.
#Hijab #SupremeCourtOfIndia

Pasha: A survey of Sikh students in France show how they felt humiliated to enter school. It showed how they lost their identity and how they wanted to leave the country. Even Muslims. Muslim students were negatively impacted.

Justice Gupta : We don't think this is relevant.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Gupta : Kamat made a submission that religions are manifestation of the same God. It was in that context we asked do all religions accept the same thought.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha refers to verses in Quran, and says Quran mandates respect towards other religions.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha cites the verse on non-believers: "O you disbelievers! I do not worship what you worship, nor do you worship what I worship. I will never worship what you worship, nor will you ever worship what I worship. You have your way, and I have my Way.”
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Pasha concludes.
Bench says it will continue on Monday at 2PM.
#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Categories

More from this author

Related Threads

Popular Threads

Categories

More from this author

Related Threads

Popular Threads

Unroll Thread