If A Muslim Woman Thinks Wearing of Hijab is Conducive for Her Religion, No authority Can Say Otherwise: Dushyant Dave To Supreme Court [DAY 7]

The Supreme Court today continued hearing the petitions challenging the Karnataka High Court's judgment which upheld the ban on wearing hijab by Muslim students in educational institutions. Today was the seventh day of hearing by bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia. Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave appearing for the Petitioners made elaborate submissions on religious and cultural diversity of India, Constituent assembly debates and protection of religious rights under Article 25 of the Constitution. He submitted that Muslim girls wearing Hijab cannot be said to have hurt anybody's sentiments. "Our identity is hijab," Dave remarked. He added that first, the whole dispute over 'love jihad' and now, the prevention of Muslim girls from wearing hijab to educational institutions, reflects a pattern to "marginalise" the minority community. He urged the Bench that with the expansion of scope of Article 19 and 21, the Constitution has to interpreted liberally. "Religious right is individualistic; it is the choice of an individual…" Hearing will continue tomorrow at 11 AM, where Dave will continue his submissions. Courtroom Exchange Hijab ban and other series of actions to marginalise minority community: Dave Tracing the origin of harmonious co-existence of various religions in India to 5,000 years ago, Dave said, "This country is built upon a beautiful culture…built on traditions. And in 5,000 years, we have adopted many religions...India gave birth to Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism. Islam came here without conquering and we accepted. India is the only place where people who came here settled here without conquest, except the British. This country is built on a liberal tradition, in unity in diversity." However, he added that there have been a series of acts and omissions lately, which show a pattern to marginalise the minority community. "…How is it unity in diversity if a Hindu has to get permission from Magistrate to marry a Muslim? How can you shackle love? And Magistrate will take his sweet time and all the fringe elements will come in. How is it democracy? History shows, Akbar married a Rajput woman, and he allowed worship of Krishna… 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…" Dave argued that though this case is ostensibly about uniform but, it is about how to tell Muslim students you are not allowed. "This case is really about malice in law. It is about we are telling the minority community; you will do what we tell you…" Minorities can be an explosive force which if erupts can destroy the social fabric: Dave Elaborating on the need to prosper religious diversity, Dave submitted, "It will be really nice when a Hindu girl asks a hijab wearing Muslim girl why you are wearing hijab, and she talks about her religion. It is really beautiful." However, on the point of their 'segregation', he added, that Minorities can be an explosive force which if erupts can destroy the social fabric. "More than 10,000 suicide bombings have taken place in Islamic world. Only 1 in India. This means, minorities have faith in our country...read papers, will see reports of daily suicide bombings in Iraq, Syria...but not in India…Religion is a very difficult frame of mind to control among the masses, it is the leaders who can guide the masses." He referred to the speeches made by the Chairman of the Minorities Committee in the Constituent Assembly, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, to submit, "Nothing is better than to minority to place a sense of confidence in majority, and also on the majority to think who we will feel if we are treated like them." Justice Gupta asked Dave as to what extent the Constituent Assembly Debates are relevant for interpreting. Dave responded, "They are expressing the will of the people." Justice Gupta then asked him if there is any precedent of Court relying upon Constituent Assembly Debates to interpret Constitution. Justice Dhulia pointed out that in the NJAC case, Constituent Assembly Debates speeches were referred to. Dave added that in Puttaswamy case as well, debates were referred. Justice Gupta then asked, "To what extent Constituent Assembly Debates are relevant to interpret the present day Constitution?" Dave responded, "To the fullest extent…They gave birth to Constitution. These are people who spent over 2 years on Constitution. And their views are sacrosanct." He continued, "Fraternity is one of the avowed goals of Constitutions. And it has been completely lost sight of by the Government…Kindly keep of the warnings of these Great Indians first, this is my preface." Does wearing Hijab threaten unity and integrity of India? Dave asks Dave submitted that for centuries, Muslim women have been wearing hijab in countries across Malaysia, Arabia, or America, ...

If A Muslim Woman Thinks Wearing of Hijab is Conducive for Her Religion, No authority Can Say Otherwise: Dushyant Dave To Supreme Court [DAY 7]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags