New Delhi. The hearing on the Karnataka hijab case lasted for about two hours in the court on the second day. During this, the court commented on the argument of a pro-hijab lawyer. The Supreme Court said that wearing a rudraksh or a cross cannot be compared with a hijab. Explaining the reason behind this, he said that those things are worn inside the clothes. In fact, earlier pro-hijab lawyer Devdat Kamat had said that there is no investigation of students wearing rudraksh or cross in Karnataka, but Muslim girls wearing hijab are being stopped forcibly. The court hearing lasted for about two hours.
The lawyer gave some such argument for the hijab
In the 2-hour hearing, the pro-hijab lawyer gave examples of countries like America, South Africa, Canada, England, France, Turkey, Austria for 1 hour. After this Kamat came to the Constitution of India and as soon as he started talking about it, Justice Hemant Gupta, who was presiding over the bench of the two judges present there, said in a mild manner, let’s finally come back to India. Apart from this, Devdutt Kamat, arguing for Hijba, said that personal liberty guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution can be violated when it is against law and order or morality. But girls wearing hijab is not against any of this. On this point of the lawyer, the court said that wearing hijab is not prohibited, but wearing it in school is forbidden. The reason behind this is that there is a dress code in all public places.
At the end of the hearing, a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia said that it will be continued on the coming Thursday at 11.30 am. Earlier, when today’s hearing began, advocate Ejaz Maqbool had told the court that, “I have submitted a compilation of the main points said in all the 23 petitioners to the court. Apart from this, have also created a WhatsApp group and shared it with the lawyers.
New Delhi. The hearing on the Karnataka hijab case lasted for about two hours in the court on the second day. During this, the court commented on the argument of a pro-hijab lawyer. The Supreme Court said that wearing a rudraksh or a cross cannot be compared with a hijab. Explaining the reason behind this, he said that those things are worn inside the clothes. In fact, earlier pro-hijab lawyer Devdat Kamat had said that there is no investigation of students wearing rudraksh or cross in Karnataka, but Muslim girls wearing hijab are being stopped forcibly. The court hearing lasted for about two hours.
The lawyer gave some such argument for the hijab
In the 2-hour hearing, the pro-hijab lawyer gave examples of countries like America, South Africa, Canada, England, France, Turkey, Austria for 1 hour. After this Kamat came to the Constitution of India and as soon as he started talking about it, Justice Hemant Gupta, who was presiding over the bench of the two judges present there, said in a mild manner, let’s finally come back to India. Apart from this, Devdutt Kamat, arguing for Hijba, said that personal liberty guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution can be violated when it is against law and order or morality. But girls wearing hijab is not against any of this. On this point of the lawyer, the court said that wearing hijab is not prohibited, but wearing it in school is forbidden. The reason behind this is that there is a dress code in all public places.
At the end of the hearing, a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia said that it will be continued on the coming Thursday at 11.30 am. Earlier, when today’s hearing began, advocate Ejaz Maqbool had told the court that, “I have submitted a compilation of the main points said in all the 23 petitioners to the court. Apart from this, have also created a WhatsApp group and shared it with the lawyers.
New Delhi. The hearing on the Karnataka hijab case lasted for about two hours in the court on the second day. During this, the court commented on the argument of a pro-hijab lawyer. The Supreme Court said that wearing a rudraksh or a cross cannot be compared with a hijab. Explaining the reason behind this, he said that those things are worn inside the clothes. In fact, earlier pro-hijab lawyer Devdat Kamat had said that there is no investigation of students wearing rudraksh or cross in Karnataka, but Muslim girls wearing hijab are being stopped forcibly. The court hearing lasted for about two hours.
The lawyer gave some such argument for the hijab
In the 2-hour hearing, the pro-hijab lawyer gave examples of countries like America, South Africa, Canada, England, France, Turkey, Austria for 1 hour. After this Kamat came to the Constitution of India and as soon as he started talking about it, Justice Hemant Gupta, who was presiding over the bench of the two judges present there, said in a mild manner, let’s finally come back to India. Apart from this, Devdutt Kamat, arguing for Hijba, said that personal liberty guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution can be violated when it is against law and order or morality. But girls wearing hijab is not against any of this. On this point of the lawyer, the court said that wearing hijab is not prohibited, but wearing it in school is forbidden. The reason behind this is that there is a dress code in all public places.
At the end of the hearing, a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia said that it will be continued on the coming Thursday at 11.30 am. Earlier, when today’s hearing began, advocate Ejaz Maqbool had told the court that, “I have submitted a compilation of the main points said in all the 23 petitioners to the court. Apart from this, have also created a WhatsApp group and shared it with the lawyers.
New Delhi. The hearing on the Karnataka hijab case lasted for about two hours in the court on the second day. During this, the court commented on the argument of a pro-hijab lawyer. The Supreme Court said that wearing a rudraksh or a cross cannot be compared with a hijab. Explaining the reason behind this, he said that those things are worn inside the clothes. In fact, earlier pro-hijab lawyer Devdat Kamat had said that there is no investigation of students wearing rudraksh or cross in Karnataka, but Muslim girls wearing hijab are being stopped forcibly. The court hearing lasted for about two hours.
The lawyer gave some such argument for the hijab
In the 2-hour hearing, the pro-hijab lawyer gave examples of countries like America, South Africa, Canada, England, France, Turkey, Austria for 1 hour. After this Kamat came to the Constitution of India and as soon as he started talking about it, Justice Hemant Gupta, who was presiding over the bench of the two judges present there, said in a mild manner, let’s finally come back to India. Apart from this, Devdutt Kamat, arguing for Hijba, said that personal liberty guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution can be violated when it is against law and order or morality. But girls wearing hijab is not against any of this. On this point of the lawyer, the court said that wearing hijab is not prohibited, but wearing it in school is forbidden. The reason behind this is that there is a dress code in all public places.
At the end of the hearing, a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia said that it will be continued on the coming Thursday at 11.30 am. Earlier, when today’s hearing began, advocate Ejaz Maqbool had told the court that, “I have submitted a compilation of the main points said in all the 23 petitioners to the court. Apart from this, have also created a WhatsApp group and shared it with the lawyers.
New Delhi. The hearing on the Karnataka hijab case lasted for about two hours in the court on the second day. During this, the court commented on the argument of a pro-hijab lawyer. The Supreme Court said that wearing a rudraksh or a cross cannot be compared with a hijab. Explaining the reason behind this, he said that those things are worn inside the clothes. In fact, earlier pro-hijab lawyer Devdat Kamat had said that there is no investigation of students wearing rudraksh or cross in Karnataka, but Muslim girls wearing hijab are being stopped forcibly. The court hearing lasted for about two hours.
The lawyer gave some such argument for the hijab
In the 2-hour hearing, the pro-hijab lawyer gave examples of countries like America, South Africa, Canada, England, France, Turkey, Austria for 1 hour. After this Kamat came to the Constitution of India and as soon as he started talking about it, Justice Hemant Gupta, who was presiding over the bench of the two judges present there, said in a mild manner, let’s finally come back to India. Apart from this, Devdutt Kamat, arguing for Hijba, said that personal liberty guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution can be violated when it is against law and order or morality. But girls wearing hijab is not against any of this. On this point of the lawyer, the court said that wearing hijab is not prohibited, but wearing it in school is forbidden. The reason behind this is that there is a dress code in all public places.
At the end of the hearing, a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia said that it will be continued on the coming Thursday at 11.30 am. Earlier, when today’s hearing began, advocate Ejaz Maqbool had told the court that, “I have submitted a compilation of the main points said in all the 23 petitioners to the court. Apart from this, have also created a WhatsApp group and shared it with the lawyers.
New Delhi. The hearing on the Karnataka hijab case lasted for about two hours in the court on the second day. During this, the court commented on the argument of a pro-hijab lawyer. The Supreme Court said that wearing a rudraksh or a cross cannot be compared with a hijab. Explaining the reason behind this, he said that those things are worn inside the clothes. In fact, earlier pro-hijab lawyer Devdat Kamat had said that there is no investigation of students wearing rudraksh or cross in Karnataka, but Muslim girls wearing hijab are being stopped forcibly. The court hearing lasted for about two hours.
The lawyer gave some such argument for the hijab
In the 2-hour hearing, the pro-hijab lawyer gave examples of countries like America, South Africa, Canada, England, France, Turkey, Austria for 1 hour. After this Kamat came to the Constitution of India and as soon as he started talking about it, Justice Hemant Gupta, who was presiding over the bench of the two judges present there, said in a mild manner, let’s finally come back to India. Apart from this, Devdutt Kamat, arguing for Hijba, said that personal liberty guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution can be violated when it is against law and order or morality. But girls wearing hijab is not against any of this. On this point of the lawyer, the court said that wearing hijab is not prohibited, but wearing it in school is forbidden. The reason behind this is that there is a dress code in all public places.
At the end of the hearing, a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia said that it will be continued on the coming Thursday at 11.30 am. Earlier, when today’s hearing began, advocate Ejaz Maqbool had told the court that, “I have submitted a compilation of the main points said in all the 23 petitioners to the court. Apart from this, have also created a WhatsApp group and shared it with the lawyers.
New Delhi. The hearing on the Karnataka hijab case lasted for about two hours in the court on the second day. During this, the court commented on the argument of a pro-hijab lawyer. The Supreme Court said that wearing a rudraksh or a cross cannot be compared with a hijab. Explaining the reason behind this, he said that those things are worn inside the clothes. In fact, earlier pro-hijab lawyer Devdat Kamat had said that there is no investigation of students wearing rudraksh or cross in Karnataka, but Muslim girls wearing hijab are being stopped forcibly. The court hearing lasted for about two hours.
The lawyer gave some such argument for the hijab
In the 2-hour hearing, the pro-hijab lawyer gave examples of countries like America, South Africa, Canada, England, France, Turkey, Austria for 1 hour. After this Kamat came to the Constitution of India and as soon as he started talking about it, Justice Hemant Gupta, who was presiding over the bench of the two judges present there, said in a mild manner, let’s finally come back to India. Apart from this, Devdutt Kamat, arguing for Hijba, said that personal liberty guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution can be violated when it is against law and order or morality. But girls wearing hijab is not against any of this. On this point of the lawyer, the court said that wearing hijab is not prohibited, but wearing it in school is forbidden. The reason behind this is that there is a dress code in all public places.
At the end of the hearing, a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia said that it will be continued on the coming Thursday at 11.30 am. Earlier, when today’s hearing began, advocate Ejaz Maqbool had told the court that, “I have submitted a compilation of the main points said in all the 23 petitioners to the court. Apart from this, have also created a WhatsApp group and shared it with the lawyers.
New Delhi. The hearing on the Karnataka hijab case lasted for about two hours in the court on the second day. During this, the court commented on the argument of a pro-hijab lawyer. The Supreme Court said that wearing a rudraksh or a cross cannot be compared with a hijab. Explaining the reason behind this, he said that those things are worn inside the clothes. In fact, earlier pro-hijab lawyer Devdat Kamat had said that there is no investigation of students wearing rudraksh or cross in Karnataka, but Muslim girls wearing hijab are being stopped forcibly. The court hearing lasted for about two hours.
The lawyer gave some such argument for the hijab
In the 2-hour hearing, the pro-hijab lawyer gave examples of countries like America, South Africa, Canada, England, France, Turkey, Austria for 1 hour. After this Kamat came to the Constitution of India and as soon as he started talking about it, Justice Hemant Gupta, who was presiding over the bench of the two judges present there, said in a mild manner, let’s finally come back to India. Apart from this, Devdutt Kamat, arguing for Hijba, said that personal liberty guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution can be violated when it is against law and order or morality. But girls wearing hijab is not against any of this. On this point of the lawyer, the court said that wearing hijab is not prohibited, but wearing it in school is forbidden. The reason behind this is that there is a dress code in all public places.
At the end of the hearing, a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia said that it will be continued on the coming Thursday at 11.30 am. Earlier, when today’s hearing began, advocate Ejaz Maqbool had told the court that, “I have submitted a compilation of the main points said in all the 23 petitioners to the court. Apart from this, have also created a WhatsApp group and shared it with the lawyers.
