Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing (Day 8)- LIVE UPDATES
AG: Coming back to the issue of individual dignity...issue of dignity and liberty of a human being, women.. cannot be lying in vacuum and it needs to be followed..
AG refers to precedent MS Bhati vs National Insurance Co Ltd (2019) 12 SCC 248 - it has been held there a judgment will bind the court though same has been referred to larger bench.
AG therefore says Sabarimala judgment is binding.
AG refers to Sabarimala case judgment.
CJ asks if Sabarimala judgment can be followed in view of the review pending before the larger bench.
Justice Dixit: What is the legal authority if a judgement is referred to a larger bench, should courts refer to the judgement or not?
AG: This according to me is concept of liberty of that particular person. Choice to wear, every women of every faith has that choice...There cannot be a religious sanction by way of judicial declaration. This is not for college or school but entire community.
CJ : You want to say suppose the court hold that wearing of hijab is essential religious practice, the women who do not wear will be lowering their dignity?
AG: Certainly milords and it is in the context of dress.
AG: Today by religious sanction a judicial declaration is sought. The element of choice goes away. A women concerned becomes obligated by religious sanction to wear that particular dress..
AG : A judicial declaration to tell women to wear only...
Justice Dixit : Suppose if we declare Mangalsutra to be an essential practice of Hindu religion, does it mean that we have directed all Hindu women to wear it?
AG : If somebody is to come before lordships seeking a declaration, that we want every women of that faith to wear, would it not violate the right of the person, to whom we are sitting down and subjugating. According to me it is impermissible in this day and age.
AG : The last leg of my submissions is, accepting all that the petitioners submit, in the light of law laid down by SC in Sabarimala, would it be possible to accept the wearing of hijab in the light of constitutional morality and individual dignity ?
AG: As matter of fact, the petitioners have not relied upon any interpretation and relied on this(http://Quran.com) and then on the Kerala judgement.