Muslim Personal Law Board expresses shock over Karnataka HC’s hijab verdict, calls it discriminatory

News Network
March 16, 2022

Lucknow: All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) general secretary Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani has expressed ‘regret and disappointment’ on the Karnataka High Court order upholding the ban on hijab in educational institutions.

The cleric told reporters that the board will be holding an online meeting soon to discuss the way forward on the issue apart from tabling the matter in an offline meeting to be held at the end of March.

AIMPLB has previously expressed intent to move SC in the matter.

Rahmani called Tuesday’s order a ‘discriminatory one towards Muslims’, making comparisons with certain governments altering aviation laws to appease a community and governments allowing some groups and communities to use their religious symbols.

He also refuted the claim that hijab is not essential to Islam and said banning it is intrusion in constitutional rights of Muslim citizens.

“Islam and Shariat have made certain things farz (duty) and wajib (obligatory) on Muslims and it is laazim (pre-requisite) that they be followed. Hijab is one such obligation which is a pre-requisite. If certain Muslims in their ignorance and laziness do not perform namaz or roza, they cannot be eliminated from Islam but they do commit a sin. Similarly, if certain Muslims don’t follow the hijab, it does not make the act non-essential to Islam,” he explained.

He further said: “It is the constitutional right of every individual to wear what he deems fit. There are religions which use religious symbols and certain governments go all out to bear expenses and alerting aviation laws for their display.”

In that context, the order is discriminatory. “Schools have the right to decide upon a uniform but it has come to our notice that the case that went in court was not related to schools but was for colleges, where the coercion of uniforms cannot be made,” he stated.

Meanwhile, Islamic seminary Darul Uloom Deoband has also said that it ‘disagreed’ with the decision of the Karnataka High Court regarding the hijab ban in educational institutions.

It urged Muslim societies and NGOs to approach the Supreme Court to challenge the verdict.

Maulana Mufti Abul Qasim Nomani, the vice-chancellor of Darul Uloom Deoband, said: “Not just Muslims but all religions have freedom in India. In a democratic setup, no government or government-recognised organisation should make any law that is against the spirit of the Constitution. No such code of conduct should be enforced that is against any religion.”

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 18,2024

resort.jpg

Mangaluru: The Ullal police have arrested Manohar, the owner of Vazco Beach Resort, and its manager Bharath in connection with the drowning of three college girls from Mysuru at the resort’s swimming pool on November 17.

City Commissioner of Police Anupam Agrawal confirmed the arrests, stating that a case has been registered under Section 106 of BNS. The bodies of the victims, all in their twenties, have been handed over to their parents. The women had arrived at the resort for a weekend getaway on November 16.

Following the tragic incident, the resort was sealed by officials led by Mangaluru Assistant Commissioner Harshavardhan. The trade license of the resort, issued on June 13, 2024, has been suspended, and the tourism department has temporarily revoked the resort's registration. These actions prohibit the resort from engaging in any tourism-related activities until further notice.

Someshwara TMC Chief Officer stated that the suspension was due to the resort's failure to implement adequate safety measures, which resulted in the loss of three lives. Further investigations are underway.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.