The Supreme Court will soon resume hearing a batch of appeals challenging the Karnataka High Court verdict that effectively upheld the ban on wearing hijab in government schools and colleges.
Dave: Your Lordships are not just custodians of fundamental rights- for us, citizens Your Lordships can alone stand between parliamentary excesses and citizens.
Sr Adv Dave: These acts show that there is a pattern to marginalise the minority community. You want unity.. today you have to ask permission from a magistrate if a Muslim and Hindu want to marry.
Sr Adv Dave quotes Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, We on our part, taking this responsibility of laying the foundations of a free India which shall be and should be our endeavour both of the majority-- largely of the majority--.."
Sr Adv Dave continues .."and also of the minority community, have to rise to the situation that is demanded from all of us, and create and atmosphere in which the sooner these classifications disappear the better."
Sr Adv Dave reading, "So also it is far us who happen to be in a majority to think about what the minorities feel, and how we in their position would feel if we were treated in the manner in which they are treated."
Sr Adv Dave quotes HV Kamath, "When I say that a State should not identify itself with any particular religion, I do not mean to say that a State should be anti-religious or irreligious...
Continues, "..We have certainly declared that India would bea secular State. But to my mind a secular state is neither a God-less State nor an irreligious nor an anti-religious State."
Sr Adv Dave quotes Pandit Lakshmi Kant Maitra, "In other words in the affairs of the State the professing of any particular religion will not be taken into considerationat all. This I consider to be the essence of a secular state."
Sr Adv Dave quotes Krishnaswami Bharathi, "It is very necessary that we should show tolerance. That is the spirit of all religions. To say that some religious people should not do propaganda or propagate their views is to show intolerance on our part."
Justice Dhulia: But I think Seervai in his second volume wrote why propagate was included...as some faith like Christianity etc have to preach ..
Dave: yes there is a modern Krishna group too who preaches Hinduism beautifully. Every one has the right to propagate #Hijab
Dave: for some one who studied for 14 years in a Christian institution no one forced me ever to get converted to Christianity. My children also went to the same. Who goes to the most mosquito infested areas of this country, it is Christian missionaries #SupremeCourt#Hijab
Dave:. Today we feel if someone falls in love and marries, we think it is an attempt to convert. I don't know where are we heading... #SupremeCourt#SupremeCourtofIndia#Hijab
Justice Gupta: To what extent constituent assembly debates are imp to interpret this provision. We have to look at the language of the law
Dave: But the debates show the will of the ones who drafted the constitution
Justice Gupta: to what extent are constituent assembly debates are relevant to interpret the current day Constitution
Dave: Constitution is not a changing document. It is they who drafted it. Preamble, basic structure are part of constitution #SupremeCourt#SupremeCourtofIndia
Dave: It can aid to fullest extent
Justice Dhulia: please give us the precedents on this Constituent assembly debates point
Dave: Constitution is a contract between every citizen and the document. As and when a person is born, the constitution gets linked to the person. This is why framers used such beautiful words like "liberty of faith" and "liberty of religion," #SupremeCourtofIndia#Hijab
Dave: As one cannot quarrel with right of Sikhs to wear Turban you cannot quarrel with right of Muslim women to wear hijab. They have been wearing it for centuries. Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem are the most orthodox of everyone but that is how they are... #SupremeCourt
Dave: somebody wants to wear a kada, a cross or hijab. This is the beauty of our country. Does wearing of hijab threatens unity and integrity of India ?
Justice Dhulia: who is saying that ? Even HC judgment does not say this
Dave: Yes it is but what I am arguing is deeming fiction. When circular violates the Article 19(1) , 25 and then it violates 14
Justice Gupta: Article 29 as well
Dave: yes, article 29 now includes right to dignity after the Kharak Singh case #Hijab
Dave: Whenever I am free I read the Constituent Assembly debates..i have read it a dozen of times. Its beautiful intellectual piece of document. Article 25 was taken from Irish Constitution. Please see the Irish Constitution #Hijab
Dave: Theory of essential religious pratice is irrelevant and this was held by the Constitution bench of this case. The word practice does not find place in Article 25 and you cannot add words to the constitution which is not there.
Justice Gupta: What is religious practice under 25(2). Question before 9 judges bench is right of Muslim women to go to Dargah.
Justice Gupta: So what about the dress.. the word dress in Shirur Mutt is loosely explained. Then it was stated in another case how wearing a Dhoti has to be worn inside a temple
Dave: It has been held by the court that practice of the community is a religious practice.
Dave: this circular is an excess on part of the state. HC judgment is completely oblivious of the point. I don't think the HC judges have quite understood what Constitutional morality and constitutional ethos is #Hijab
Justice Dhulia: The problem the HC has set for itself is that what is ERP and then held that it is directory. Point is till where can fundamental rights can be exercised.. classroom?
Dave: it can be everywhere bedroom office everywhere. Bar council has an uniform for us.. but if I wear a cap can someone stop me? #Hijab
Dave: Our Prime Minister every Independence Day beautifully wears a head gear. This is to show diversity and how beautiful is this. #Hijab@narendramodi
Dave: Regarding golf course, now there is a rule that jeans is not allowed..
Justice Gupta: that's okay all these places has rules..
Dave: but it has to be seen can rights be curtailed in classroom. I say no
Justice Gupta: yes we are hearing this since 7 days
Justice Gupta: then we noticed that you were not there..
The Supreme Court will resume hearing today a batch of appeals challenging the Karnataka High Court verdict that effectively upheld the ban on wearing hijab in government schools and colleges.
Supreme Court Constitution Bench led by CJI UU Lalit continues hearing petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the 10% quota for the economically weaker sections (EWS)
#SupremeCourt to hear pleas by Gujarat cadre police officer Satish Chandra Verma, who assisted CBI probe in Ishrat Jahan encounter case, challenging his order of dismissal from service one month before his retirement as well as Delhi HC allowing the same till it next hears matter
Bench of Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy hearing case.
Sr Adv Kapil Sibal for Verma: my lords either this Court should hear or the HC, i should not be left like this.
Bench notes that HC had earlier granted interim protection.
Sibal: My writ has become infructuous, they came to this Court they got notice not stay.
Justice Joseph: what was your original prayer?
Sibal: That chargesheet can't be filed. So this Court can hear on any day.
Justice Joseph: You're retiring on 29th.
Sibal: Yes.
#SupremeCourt hearing plea by Income Tax Dept against HC dismissing plea against DK Shivakumar challenging discharge in connection with tax evasion cases.
Sr Adv Mukul Rohatgi: Your lordships may set it aside but please hear me ... If i have been assessed.
Justice Khanna: 277 and 276b are concerned.
Sr Adv Aryama Sundaram: We've not been proceeded with under 277 ...
Rohatgi: They've been given liberty what's the problem.
Justice Khanna: You file a return, he'll escape.
Rohatgi: they can levy any penalty... It's not that it is res judicata
SC says it may issue notice
SC: We have to set aside some findings. Other contentions we'll examine on merits.
Supreme Court hears a plea by Enforcement Directorate seeks plea for transfer of investigation in the NAN scam case relating to IAS officer Anil Tuteja
CJI UU Lalit: But why is this an Article 32 petition? @dir_ed
SG: This is such a case that this court can excercise Article 142. A matter of this magnitude before the highest court of the country
CJI: Let us see the offences
Sr Adv Dwivedi: this scam is one which occurred during the BJP rule
SG: i will argue on facts and not allegations
SG: These highly placed officers in connivance with Authorities in constitutional posts took advantage. I have not mentioned names. But I have whatsapp charts
We have not revealed names so that faith of people is not shaken upon system