Supreme Court
Hijab Ban Case: Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, representing some of the petitioners challenging the Karnataka High Court verdict on hijab, told the Supreme Court on Monday that there is a pattern of marginalization of a community. Simultaneously, citing the Pulwama attack, he said that there was only one suicide bombing in India, which shows that the minorities have placed their faith in the country.
Dave told a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia that there have been more than 10,000 suicide bombings in the Islamic world and this country only suffered one suicide bombing in Pulwama, which reflects the faith of minority communities in the country. Is. He said that religion is a very difficult mental framework to guide the people and it is the leaders who can guide them.
Hijab is her identity – Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave
Dave said that the whole issue of love jihad and now barring Muslim girls from wearing hijab in educational institutions, reflects a pattern to marginalize the minority community. He said that Muslim girls wearing hijab cannot hurt anyone’s sentiments and hijab is their identity. Emphasizing on the importance of liberal aspect of Indian civilization, Dave said that the country is built on liberal tradition and there is unity in diversity. He said that if a Hindu girl asks a Muslim girl wearing a hijab why she is wearing it? And she talks about her religion, so it’s really beautiful.
West has already allowed hijab: Dushyant Dave
Dave said that the West has already allowed the hijab and the US military has also allowed the turban. He said that just as no one can dispute the right of Sikhs to wear a turban, similarly there should be no quarrel with the right of Muslim women to wear the hijab and stressed that for centuries Muslim women have been wearing the hijab in countries around the world. are coming. He argued that the hijab is important for Muslim women and it is their belief. He said that someone wants to wear a tilak, someone wants to wear a cross, everyone has a right and that is the beauty of social life.
‘How will wearing hijab threaten the unity and integrity of the country?’
Asking the question, he said that how will the unity and integrity of the country be threatened by wearing hijab. To this the bench replied that the judgment of the Karnataka High Court also does not say so and no one is saying so. The bench also observed that the argument here may be self-contradictory, saying that the right to wear hijab comes from Article 19 and can be restricted only under 19(2) by a statutory law. Dave said that in this case the fundamental rights under Article 25 can be exercised anywhere.
Hearing on the petitions challenging the decision of March 15 continues tomorrow
The bench said that some judgments talk about religious practice inside religious places. Dave said that Article 25 uses words like professing, professing and promoting religion and any person can exercise fundamental rights anywhere. He said that, if a Muslim woman feels that wearing a hijab is conducive to her religion, then no one can stop her. Hearing on the petitions challenging the March 15 decision of the Karnataka High Court upholding the ban on hijab in pre-university colleges will continue on Tuesday.