New Delhi: Representing one of the petitioners challenging the Karnataka High Court verdict in the hijab row, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibbal submitted before the Supreme Court on Thursday that the matter deserved listing before a Constitutional bench.
Sibbal, while arguing the case, observed that the hijab was a part of the right to expression guaranteed under Article 19, further observing that exceptions listed under the article such as decency, public order and morality were not violated in any manner through hijab.
"They (state) can't object. The idea was to create an environment where the state takes action. An individual at a roadside can not say 'don't wear a hijab'. I can't say that to him, he can't say that to me," the former said.
Also read: Karnataka hijab row: Is a woman responsible if her hijab provokes anyone, SC told
"The question your lordships first have to decide is if wearing of dress is an expression of self; whether it is linked to bodily autonomy ... dress is both at the heart of privacy and expression in Article 19(1)(a). If I have that right at a public place, does it get extinguished as soon as I enter the school gate?" Sr Adv Sibbal further argued.
The counsel, making their submissions before the division bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhuliya, argued that popular practices of faith varied based on country, and hence the rights of Muslims to wear hijab could not be singled out.
"All across the world the courts and a huge segment of the population recognize hijab as their cultural practice, and we are a part of the global village. We are a majority in our country and a minority in other countries. Like we display symbols of our religion, Muslims also have a right to wear hijab," Senior Advocate Meenakshi Arora observed.
"There is a class of people who believe that senses of class and dignity are attached to clothes. It cannot be said how much to cover up in order to secure dignity," Advocate Shoeb Alam, appearing for one of the petitioners, argued.
Sr Adv Colin Gonsalves noted that there was no better way to teach children about religion and culture than their classmates expressing it to them via symbols like hijab. "Constitution is a living being and you change it with changing times," he said.
The court will continue hearing the matter on 19th September from 2 pm. Today was the sixth day of the hearing and numerous advocates on the petitioners' side are given a time limit in which they have to conclude the arguments. The arguments from the petitioners' side had to be concluded today but it is likely to stretch for another 2 days.
