‘How Would Wearing Hijab Threaten Unity And Integrity Of The Country?’ Hijab Row Petitioners To SC

Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, representing some petitioners challenging the Karnataka High Court judgment on hijab, on Monday told the Supreme Court that there is a pattern to marginalize a community.

Hijab, Unity And Integrity, Hijab Row, Dushyant Dave, Karnataka High Court, Supreme Court, India, minorities, love jihad, Muslim girls, Muslim, Sikhs, Article 19, Article 25, religious practice, fundamental rights — ‘How Would Wearing Hijab Threaten Unity And Integrity Of The Country?’ Petitioners In Hijab Row To SC

Hijab Row: Citing the Pulwama terrorist attack that killed 48 CRPF soldiers on February 14, 2019, senior advocate Dushyant Dave, representing some petitioners challenging the Karnataka High Court judgment on hijab, on Monday told the Supreme Court that there is a pattern to marginalize a community. He said that only one suicide bombing took place in India, which shows that minorities have placed their faith in the country.

A bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia was hearing the case. Dushyant Dave submitted before the bench that more than “10,000 suicide bombings have taken place in the Islamic world” and this country only faced one suicide bombing in Pulwama, which shows minority communities’ faith in the country adding that religion is a very difficult frame of mind to guide the masses and it is leaders who can guide them.

Dave said the whole issue of “love jihad” and now, the prevention of Muslim girls from wearing hijab in educational institutions, reflects a pattern to marginalise the minority community, and Muslim girls wearing hijab cannot hurt anybody’s sentiments and hijab is their identity.

Emphasising the significance of the liberal aspect of Indian civilisation, Dave said the country is built on liberal tradition and there is unity in diversity. He submitted that if a Hindu girl asks a Muslim girl wearing hijab “why is she wearing it? And she talks about her religion. This is really beautiful”.

Add India.com as a Preferred Source

Dave added that the West has already permitted hijab and the American army has also allowed turbans. He said as one cannot quarrel with the right of Sikhs to wear turbans, similarly, one should also have no quarrel with the right of Muslim women to wear hijab, and stressed that for centuries, Muslim women have been wearing hijab in countries across the world.

He contended that hijab is important for Muslim women and it is their faith and added that somebody wants to wear the tilak, somebody wants to wear the cross, everybody has the right and that is the beauty of social life.

“How would wearing hijab threaten the unity and integrity of the country?” he said. At this, the bench replied that even the Karnataka High Court judgment does not say that and nobody is saying that.

The bench also said the argument here could be self-contradictory, saying the right to wear the hijab flows from Article 19 and it can be restricted only under 19(2) only by statutory law. Dave submitted that fundamental rights, in this case under Article 25, can be exercised anywhere.

The bench said some judgments talk about religious practice inside religious places. Dave said Article 25 uses the words freely practice, profess, and propagate religion, and a person can exercise fundamental rights anywhere, be it a classroom too.

He said if a Muslim woman thinks that wearing of hijab is conducive to her religion, no authority, or no court can say otherwise.

The hearing on the petitions challenging the Karnataka High Court’s judgment of March 15 upholding the ban on hijab in pre-university colleges will continue on Tuesday.

(With IANS inputs)