Thread by @barandbench

Day 8: [Hijab Ban hearing]

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.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan

Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave is expected to continue his arguments.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Hearing begins.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave is taking the court through judgments on the extent of Article 25.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave refers to the judgment in Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin v State of Bombay.

indiankanoon.org/doc/510078/

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: "In the face of the language used, no distinction could be drawn between beliefs that were basic to a religion, or religious practices that were considered to be essential by a religious sect, on the one hand.."

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan

Sr Adv Dave: "..and on the other beliefs and practices that did not form the core of a religion or of the practices of that religion. The phraseology employed cut across and effaced these distinctions."

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan

Justice Gupta: There is no comment about the other judges, whether they are agreeing with Justice Iyengar.

Sr Adv Dave: No, he is concurring.

Justice Dhulia: Where is all this leading?

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: That essential religious practice was never a ground for judicial pronouncement.

Both Justice Nariman & Chandrachud make a serious error in saying essential religious practice has been identified.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave quotes, "that as such a religious denomination it is entitled to ensure its continuity by maintaining the bond of religious unity and discipline.."

Hijab is a bond that holds the community together.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Justice Dhulia: Can't we deal with the situation without going into essential religious practices?

Sr Adv Dave: But the High Court has only dealt with ERP.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Justice Dhulia: They were dealing with the 5 Feb order which says this judgment etc. They had to perhaps deal with that.

Sr Adv Dave: But those three judgment were completely irrelevant. This was put to the HC

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave reads the judgment in the case of Tilkayat Shri Govindlalji v State Of Rajasthan.
indiankanoon.org/doc/1913766/

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave reads, "In deciding the question as to whether a given religious practice is an integral part of the religion or not, the test always would be whether it is regarded as such by the community following the religion or not."

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab

Sr Adv Dave: "In cases where conflicting evidence is produced in respect of rival contentions as to competing religious practices the Court may not be able to resolve the dispute by a blind application of the ..."

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: "..formula that the community decides which practice is an integral part of its religion, because the community may speak with more than one voice and the formula would, therefore, break down."

Dave: Here community has one voice!

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Sr Adv Dave: The court has clearly drawn the conclusion. He is clarifying when there is dispute between the community - court has to decide based on evidence.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: I urge that the test is not essential practice, but religious practice.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: Everybody in looks at almighty in different ways. Those who go to Sabrimala wear black clothes, that's the tradition.

Everybody has a right to enjoy religious freedom in the most personalised and individualistic way possible.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Sr Adv Dave: The limitation is only that you don't hurt anyone.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave recapitulates important points from the judgment in the case of Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v Sri Laskhmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt.

indiankanoon.org/doc/1430396/

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave now quotes the judgment in Bijoe Emmanuel v State of Kerala.

indiankanoon.org/doc/1508089/

Dave: This is very important because it interprets statute which is pari materia with Karnataka Education Act.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave reads, "If the two circulars are to be so interpreted as to compel each and every pupil to join in the singing of the National Anthem despite his genuine..."

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: "..conscientious religious objection, then such compulsion would clearly contavene the rights guaranteed by Art. 19(1)(a) and Art. 25(1)."

Dave: I would say Article 25 is an article of toleration.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: I have seen personally many a times, uniform is an unnecessary burden on majority section in society.

Most can't afford. I see with my caddies in the golf course.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Justice Gupta: In many schools, there can be disparity. Therefore uniform is.. you can't see richness or poverty.

Dave: No, I am for uniform. Every institution likes identity.

Justice Gupta: We have very limited question- whether headgear can be allowed.

#Hijab

Sr Adv Dave refers to the judgment in Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala.

indiankanoon.org/doc/257876/

Points out important passages to court.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Justice Gupta: Can we say individual opinion in constituent assembly is relevant?

Dave: Just to understand their intent, and mindset.

Justice Dhulia: Purposive.. Purposive interpretation.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave refers to a judgment to answer this question.

Justice Gupta: One member of constituent assembly had individual view.

Dave: It's like today's parliamentary debate.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Justice Gupta: If there is ambiguity, some reference can be made. When statute is clear..

Sr Adv Dave: Article 25 is crystal clear, I bow down but constituent assembly debates cement that.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: Completely incorrect conclusion by the High Court. In case HC is right... Young Lawyers is now facing review.

The finding is completely contrary to Shirur Mutt & Ratilal Gandhi.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Justice Dhulia: What is the meaning of this? (refers to a portion of the High Court's judgment)

Justice Gupta: The reasoning appears to be if ERP contravenes right to equality, it cannot be given effect.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan

Sr Adv Dave differentiates between Sabrimala judgement and Hijab case.

Justice Gupta: There petitioners did not have fundamental right to enter temple..

Dave: No, My Lords.. now it has been established that everyone can enter temples

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab

Justice Dhulia: So you are also arguing that this is wrong interpretation of Young Lawyers judgment?

Sr Adv Dave: Yes! The girls want to wear the Hijab. So, whose constitutional right is violated? The other students? The school?

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab

Sr Adv Dave: The aspect of public order.. that's the only ground that can be argued against us.

Reads Superintendent v Ram Manohar Lohia.

indiankanoon.org/doc/1386353/

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: This exception is not available to the state. Nobody's peace, safety is violated and there is certainly no danger to tranquility.

This judgment has been followed later in case of Madhu Limaye also.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: 14, 19 & 21 all come into play together. I have referred to the case of IR Coelho v State of TN.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: In this case dignity is very important. Like, how a Hindu woman covers her head- it is very dignified.

Justice Gupta: The definition of dignified has changed a lot, and keeps changing.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: Dignity is very important.. this was subsequently followed in Maneka Gandhi.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave refers to Francis Coralie Mullin v The Administrator

indiankanoon.org/doc/78536/

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave reads, "But the question which arises is whether the right to life is limited only to protection of limb or faculty or does it go further and embrace something more.."

#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Sr Adv Dave reads, ".. We think that the right to life includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it, namely, the bare necessaries of life such as.."

#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Sr Adv Dave reads, "..adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter and facilities for reading, writing and expressing one-self in diverse forms, freely moving about and mixing and commingling with fellow human beings."

#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Justice Gupta: These all principles are well-know.

Sr Adv Dave: No, I am sure they are well known. I am just drawing Your Lordships attention.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave take court to his compilation: Now, Mr Mehta is here - I am sure he will have reservations.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: I am citing in support of what Justice HR Khanna's dissenting opinion where malice in law was recognised.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: Why is it that suddenly after 75 years state thought of bringing this type of prohibition? There is nothing on record to show that there was any just reason or justification. It came like a bolt from the blue.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan

Sr Adv Dave: Series of acts in Karnataka targetted minority community.

SG: We are not in a public platform. Pleas stick to pleadings.

Sr Adv Dave: I know, Mr Mehta you are here, welcome.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Justice Dhulia: Let's not..

Sr Adv Dave: There is no basis for them to pass this circular. My learned friend is not right- in the writ petition specific averments have been made.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave refers to the petition. Refers to Sulli Bai case.

Justice Gupta: That was in Maharashtra.

Dave: Women from across the country. All I am saying is, why now? After 75 years.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave takes cour through the Karnataka Education Act: Is it the purpose of the Act? I say no. Banning of Hijab does not serve the purpose of the Act.

Justice Gupta: This has been argued.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: Law is crystal clear. Executive order cannot travel outside ambit of statute. This circular is clearly outside the ambit of the act.

Justice Gupta: Circulars can supplement the act, not supplant.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: There is a direct judgment of Kerala HC is supporting petitioners. That was not appealed. In Kendriya Vidyalayas also it is allowed.

Three irrelevant judgments are relied upon in the circular.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave refers to a judgment relating to uniform discipline.

11th & 12th standard are not a regimented force. We are wearing uniform, we are also wearing Hijab in the colour of the uniform.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave: It's not just a constitutional right.. it's also an international convention. This court has always interpreted in favour of international convention.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Sr Adv Dave quotes Swami Vivekananda, "I am proud to belong to a religion which has taught the world both tolerance and universal acceptance. We believe not only in universal toleration, but we accept all religions as true.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan

Continues, "I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth."

#Hijab #SupremeCourt

Sr Adv Dave: These are the words I respectfully submit. Tagore said we must awake in a country where fear does not exist.

We cannot put fear in the mind of people.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave concludes arguments.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta: I beleive the other side has concluded.

Court: We will not allow anyone else to argue.

SG: We have all troubled you. On our side, the AG, Mr Natraj and myself will only argue.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

SG: We will not repeat. We have divided the issues. Our side should be over today.

SG begins arguments.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

SG Mehta summarises petitioners arguments: Broadly, my submission on the point of Constitution Bench submission is this..

Justice Gupta: Mr Dave has argued something different.

SG: Any religious practice also, there is a law on how that is established.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: let me start with - the order in question was required for more than one justifiable reasons. This order does not prevent a particular community students to not wear a particular apparel. The order says uniform- has to be uniform.

#Hijab

Justice Gupta: A circular has been referred to where it is said that mandating uniform is illegal.

SG Mehta: High Court has found that document to be unsubstantiated.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: two facts-

1) till 2021, no girl student was wearing Hijab. Nor this question ever arose.

2) It would be disservice to contend the circular only prohibits hijab. Other community came with saffron shawl, that is ALSO prohibited.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: One more dimension- if the govt would not have acted the way it did, it would have been in deriliction of its Constitutional duty.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta takes court through the chronology of events.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: So far, the uniform part of essential discipline in schools was being scrupulously followed.

Then a movement started on social media by an organisation called Popular Front of India. It was designed to create an agitation.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: There were continuous social media messages that start wearing Hijab. This is on record. I have filed in cover details of that.

This was not a spontaneous act. It was a part of larger conspiracy. Children were acting as advised.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Court: Is this part of pleadings?

SG Mehta: Yes, I will show.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: This is not the childrens' orginal thinking. No one was wearing Hijab since 2004 as recorded by High Court. Suddenly there was an agitation.

Court: Is the chargesheet there?

SG: Yes.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: They were never wearing headscarves since 2004 or before that.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: Suddenly everyone starting activating that we have a right. Agitation, children at the ..

Justice Gupta: In one of the writs, there is an averment that they were wearing Hijab and it was stopped.

SG: This is an unsubstantiated assertion.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: The uniform code has been in vogue since 2004. It has statutory backing.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: They don't say Hijab, they say all students will wear prescribed uniform.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: The far-fetched arguments that the government is throttling the voice of minority etc. No, the government had to intervene in the circumstances because of the public order being disturbed.

Justice Dhulia: What public order?

SG: There were agitations.

#Hijab

SG Mehta: Students were banging the gates, saying let us come with Hijab then others were coming with saffron gamchas.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta reads the government order: We are referring to both saffron and Hijab.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: It's not that one community will be prevented from wearing one particular apparel. All communities have to wear uniform prescribed..

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: It is religion neutral direction- does not prevent one community. It says uniform must be uniformly implemented by students of all religion.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG discusses the power to issue the circular.

Justice Gupta: The argument is that, this Act is meant to regulate the institution not the students.

Section 45 is a rule making power, but it has to have something arising out of the Act.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: We have directed the institutions only that you have your uniform implemented.

And institution is not just the building.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: Section 133 gives power.

(Reads)

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: The power to issue direction is to direct institutions to comply with a particular rule. There is a statutory rule.

State government tells school that ensure there is no disparity between what students are wearing. It's perfectly within statutory power

#Hijab

SG Mehta: No saffron gamcha and no Hijab.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Court breaks for lunch. To continue hearing the case at 2 pm.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

Hearing resumes.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

SG Mehta: My first point is over.. the statutory power is there. The state has passed an order directing institutions not students to ensure compliance by a religion-neutral order.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Dhulia: You are saying your emphasis was only on dress.

SG Mehta: Yes. We did not touch on any aspect of religion.

Justice Dhulia: Had there been no uniform, you would not have objected?

SG: Then, the last line of the order takes care of that.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta reads order, "where there is no uniform prescribed, students shall wear dress that goes well with idea of equality and unity."

SG: So, no identity of a particular religion. You are going as students.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Karnataka Advocate General Prabhuling K Navadgi explains nuances of order's translation from Kannada to English.

#Hijab #SupremeCourt

SG Mehta: Even students are recipient of statutory obligations under the Act.

(reads the preamble of Karnataka Education Act)

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta discuss essential religious practice (ERP): I will show a Constitution Bench judgment.

indiankanoon.org/doc/1262157/

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Gupta: There is contradiction between two judgments between Shirur Mutt and Durgah committee, they are saying.

SG: There is none. Bench said it is safer. Since Shirur Mutt is a seven judge bench.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Petitioner counsel intervenes: When first five judge decided. Then, it went for review. In majority view, they said that Shirur Mutt said you have to leave to religion to decide and Durgah Committee said court will decide. That's the conflict.

SG Mehta: Can I complete?

Justice Gupta: this was our query.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: The argument essentially is the bench of two judges cannot decide. They say refer to larger bench. I will be able to satisfy that was is essential religious practice for Article 25...

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: There are settled guidelines. Everytime Your Lordships cannot refer to larger bench.

Justice Gupta: It is for our clarification.

SG: In each case.. suppose I say wearing tilak is my right.. but justification for reference is not made out.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: Somebody will have to go into it.

Suppose Anand Marga say along with procession and Tandav Nritya, drinking wine is also essential. What will court say?

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: Countries where religion itself is born does not follow this practice then can we say it is so essential?

In case of Sikhs, Kara and Pagdi- you cannot think of Sikhs without it.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: No assertion shows that this started with the founding of the religion.

The prectice must be so compelling.. they could've said 90% people are doing, if I don't do this I'll be excommunicated.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: the petitioners have no made any pleadings to show that the practice is so compelling that non adherence will..

Justice Dhulia: Who will decide that? That's precisely what's been decided by the High Court.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: The High Court should have avoided that. If a petitioner raises half-hearted pleadings and the HC does not deal, it will be accused.

Essential practice is not foreign. The parameters are fixed.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: Tomorrow I can say in a particular religion, drinking in public is essential.

Justice Dhulia: That will be hit directly by Article 19 and 25. What you are saying will be hit by public order, morality and health.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: Maybe if I drink alone in public. If i am from a religion which requires me to stand under the sun and drink in the morning, someone will have to decide this.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: If I come on the street and say.. take an extreme exampe.. it is part of my religion to dance nude in public.

Somebody will say it's against public order and morality. I'll be prevented by local authorities. Who will decide?

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Gupta: I don't think this extreme example is appropriate.

SG Mehta: Okay, if someone says I want take Rath Yatra during Covid. I will say it is essential pratice.

Justice Gupta: I was part of the bench which permitted Rath Yatra.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: I am sorry for my inability to communicate. My submission is at some point, the court will have to decide whether it is essential religious practice. Shirur Mutt does not stop court.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Gupta: You are right, the court has to decide, but interpretation of Quran has been referred to. They are saying is khimar was translated to Hijab and it is essential.

SG Mehta: Maybe Holy Quran says so. When they assert that right before court of law. Merely mentioning wearing of Hijab does not make it essential religious practice, it will make it permissible or ideal pratice.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: Is it so compelling that people who do not adhere to are excommunicated or I cannot think of my existence without it?

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: What is the purpose of uniform? It is for equality, equity, and uniformity. When you have to cross that threshold, your test has to be higher.

Does it exist from time immemorial?

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: Ok, Quran mentions it. Is it so compelling?

Where nations are Islamic countries - women are fighting against Hijab.

Justice Dhulia: Which country is that?

SG: Iran. Mention in Quran means it's permissible. Maybe, ideal. Not essential.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: Now, kindly see the third limb of submissions. Its a very interesting question of law based on 19 (1) (a) - freedom of expression.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: There is a very interesting discussion on the right to wear what you want to wear where you are under regulatory mechanism of uniform. Can you express beyond uniform?

I have some foreign judgments.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta refers to an American judgment where a lawyer appeared in court wearing a baseball hat.

casemine.com/judgement/us/5…

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Gupta: Is this Supreme Court?

SG Mehta: These are persuasive. It is a state level appellate court.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta now refers to a Supreme Court of United States.

SG refers to an article written by him before this controversy began.

barandbench.com/columns/lawyer…

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Gupta: We have a parallel of Justice Chandrachud's judgment for an airman. The level of disciple in police and armed forces is much higher.

SG: level of disciple cannot differ.

Justice Gupta: It has been argued that it is not regimentary.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: Discipline cannot depend on institution, so far as dress code is concerned. I can understand different punishments.

In army you'll do 1000 pushups maybe. Disciple is discipline. This discipline does not infringe any harm on them.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Dhulia: They are saying we'll wear uniform. They are not saying we won't. Suppose a child wears muffler...

SG Mehta: That does not identify religion.

Justice Dhulia: That is very vague.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Gupta: Your argument is uniform is uniform, there cannot be substitution or addition.

SG: yes.

Justice Gupta: If a leather belt is part of uniform and someone says I don't wear leather..

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: A dress cannot show religious identity when in secular education. If tomorrow Bar council prohibits tilak, then it will have to go.

Unless we can show it is essential religious practice, which it is not.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Dhulia: What about glasses? If someone needs? Or a muffler?

SG Mehta: If it doesn't highlight your religious identity..

Justice Dhulia: If a cap or muffler can be of same colour, why not Hijab?

SG: cap if it doesn't depict religion, it can be worn

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Dhulia: Then it is problem of public order?
SG Mehta: They are saying my religious belief entitles me to wear it.
Justice Dhulia: If they say I'm wearing to wear it to protect from cold..
Justice Gupta: In Karnataka, it is not that cold.

(All laugh)

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta places before court judgments dealing with the issue from foreign jurisdictions.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: The standard of European Court of Human Rights is much lower than us. Even then they say..

Justice Dhulia: Our secularism is very different than France.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG Mehta: No, this is not the court of France.

Justice Gupta: It was case against the French Republic.

SG: They said nothing doing.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG summarises his arguments:

- There is a statutory power to prescribe uniform by schools.

- There is a statutory power in the govt to issue directions to school to ensure compliance with rules.

- There was a good and reasonable justification for exercise of power.

SG summarises his arguments:

- It was a non arbitrary exercise, making it religion neutral.

- They went before Court claiming it is essential religious practice but could not establish as per settled criteria.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG summarises his arguments:

- There were no assertions, pleadings nothing.

Justice Gupta: One verse of Quran is referred.

SG: that shows permissible, not essential.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Gupta: It was argued that on judgment day, it will be seen. Mr Dar had argued this.

SG: These are beliefs that all religions have. We have made people fearing religion. I should be God loving, not God fearing.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG: The belief is not enough to show essential.

Justice Dhulia: In Quran they have said "farz". It's not directory.

SG: My perception of the Holy Book can never be.. therefore, the Supreme Court had to lay down tests.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG: I am not criticising any community. In some countries, women cannot drive.

Ultimately, the law is this is how you established essential religious practice. When you come to court, then you have to cross a different threshold.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG shows Supreme Court judgments on test for essential religious practices.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Gupta: Mr Pasha has pointed out five essential practices of Quran.

Pasha appears and explains.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Gupta: The Kerala judgment says four essential parts. Are we dealing with Shariat law? Is my reading correct?

Pasha: Shariat includes.. in the Islamic world, counties are divided into three.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG: Anything done can be included in faith. Then there won't be any system in society.

Pasha: It's not that amorphous.

SG: It is a matter of statutory implementation of a uniform uniform!

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG: This can't be a subject matter.

Last- kindly see the words of Dr Ambedkar. He contemplated this situation.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG: This is not any religion- tomorrow I might say that someone has killed my brother, and he will not rest in peace till I murder and seek revenge.

Justice Dhulia: The court has relied on commentaries which they have held are authentic.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Dhulia: How can you decide which commentary is correct?

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG: The court analysing any religious scripture must be avoided. But for me, this is not about religion.

That's how secular country works. You can express your views on a crossroad, not by tying something..

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

SG: Suppose I tie something on my head with a beautiful message?

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta concludes arguments.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Advocate General of Karnataka Prabhuling K Navadgi begins arguments.

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Hijab #HijabBan #HijabHearing

AG Navadgi: According to me there is no conflict between the Shirur Mutt and Durgah case.

Right from Shirur Mutt to now, there is no question as to whether a constitutional court can go into the question of essential religious practice.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

AG: State can regulate secular activity related to the religion, but not religion itself.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

AG Navadgi: Shirur Mutt did not say you cannot go to court to decide.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

AG Navadgi: The next judgment which followed Shirur Mutt was the Durgah committee case.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

AG Navadgi: An impression was sought to be given that Shirur Mutt protects every religious practice and Durgah deviated for essential religious practice. But close perusal would show that the concept of essential religious practice originated in Shirur Mutt.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

AG Navadgi: Protecting every aspect of religion becomes practically impossible. Therefore, the theory of essential religious practice was evolved.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab

Justice Gupta: There is a meeting today, I think we'll continue tomorrow.

Court rises. Hearing to continue tomorrow morning.

#SupremeCourt #Hijab