New Delhi: It's like someone wants to wear dhoti, somebody wants to wear salwar kameez, the bench hearing the Hijab petition observed, on Wednesday. The Apex Court also deferred the hearing of the Hijab case to Thursday 11.30am.
The Court also observed that India can not be compared to countries like USA and Canada as we are conservative and the laws or judgements followed in those countries are in context of their culture and society, when the petition came up for hearing before the bench comprising of Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia.
The bench was hearing the submission of the petitioner who has challenged the Karnataka High Court's verdict which has kept the girl students wearing Hijab out of school and college. Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat drew the attention of the bench to cases from foreign countries regarding religious symbols being donned by people in public places.
When the bench took exceptions, Devadatt argued that though the judgements in those countries are as per their society, ultimately when the law is laid down here those judgements can be considered. The bench said it can't be following them and adviced the advocate to not cite judgements from those countries.
Devadatt wondered, "If I wear a headscarf whose morality is violated?" Bench retorted to his submission. "It's like someone wants to wear dhoti, somebody wants to wear salwar kameez," it said. Referring to the HC's ruling holding the practice as regressive, Devadatt said wearing a headscarf will not take us back. Nobody is forcing a girl to wear a head scarf. If she choses to wear, who are we to tell her not to wear?
The question is nobody is prohibiting you to wear, they are just asking you to not wear in school, the bench said. "I understand that State makes a law and bans hijab....but HC approving it....this violates choice," Devadatt said.
"You are in court you are choosing a certain propriety.....it is just a way of expression that you may not like," the bench said. "School operates in a different environment," Devadatt said adding that wearing hijab is not disturbing an public order, is not against morality and is not prejudice to anyone's fundamental rights.
Religious symbols
Devadatt presented examples of 'rudraksh' and cross which the bench brushed aside stating that that they are not visible and it can not bother if it is concealed. "That is worn inside the shirt. Nobody is going to lift the shirt and see if someone is wearing 'rudraksh'," the bench observed. He said that no student is denying to wear the uniform and just adding their expression. He also cited a judgement of the top court to contend that right to dress is a fundamental right.
Dress/Undress as fundamental right
"We cannot take this to illogical ends...if you say right to dress is a fundamental right then right to undress also becomes a fundamental right," said Justice Hemant Gupta. "I am not making cliched arguments, I am making very nuanced argument....no one is undressing in school," Devadatt said.
