What's new

IAF officers can't grow beard on religious basis: Supreme Court

Fireurimagination

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Nov 11, 2009
Messages
3,594
Reaction score
-15
Country
India
Location
India
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday held that personnel working in the Indian Air Force cannot sport a beard based on religious grounds.

A bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur said that the Centre's decision to prohibit personnel of a particular community from sporting beard does not infringe upon the fundamental rights.
The bench also comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud and L Nageswara Rao dismissed the pleas filed by two Muslim personnel of IAF who had challenged the dismissal of their pleas by the Delhi High Court.

The apex court verdict came on two petitions filed separately by two personnel, Mohammed Zubair and Ansari Aaftab Ahmed, challenging the IAF authorities' "confidential" order dated February 24, 2003, prohibiting Muslim personnel from sporting a beard.
Zubair in his petition had contended that the order was in contravention of fundamental fights of the citizen and also a government letter issued through the Ministry of Home on July 18,1990.

The said letter of the home minister permitted the uniformed Muslim/Sikh personnel to sport beard on religious grounds, provided prior permission was sought from the authorities, he said.

The Centre had said that the IAF order was in the interest of cohesiveness in a combat force and it also has security implications.

It had said that these policies are secular in character and have not been framed to govern the conduct of air force personnel of any particular religion.

The Centre has earlier told the court that IAF is undoubtedly a secular force having due regard for all religions and it is imperative that its personnel are guided by a sense of brotherhood without any distinction of caste, creed, colour or religion.

The petitioners had challenged the IAF order by way of a writ petition before the Delhi High Court and a single judge, citing certain Muslim religious texts, took the view that sporting beard was not compulsory and hence dismissed the plea.

They then approached a division bench which had also concurred with the order of the single judge and dismissed the plea following which the appeals were filed in the apex court.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-basis-supreme-court/articleshow/55998464.cms

IMO good decisions because God knows where this so called freedom on religious basis stop and thus can play havoc with discipline. Sickularists will start their rona dhona I believe
 
Out of curiosity, is it compulsory to keep a beard ? Some of my friends do not keep one, well occasionally of course and so do I.
Two opinion amongst the scholars, one says its compulsory, another says its highly recommended.

Back to topic
 
a single judge, citing certain Muslim religious texts, took the view that sporting beard was not compulsory and hence dismissed the plea.


Law of the land doesn't apply to Sikhs?

Your question is answered by the post quoted above.

Observe , national security does not figure anywhere in the judgement hence is not an issue here.
 
Law is discriminatory to sikhs and muslims both. Freedom is an important gift for the people. Curtailing basic rights is not cool here.
 
Law of the land doesn't apply to Sikhs?

Or their beard is not a threat to national security?

Court has said all personnel.. And that includes Hindu's , Sikhs, Muslims and Christians.. Its not just Muslims and Sikhs that are required grow a beard, when a Hindu goes on a pilgrimage he cannot shave and so does when there is a death of his close relative. But if this the law, then its here to stay for all.

Prior to this only Muslims and Sikhs had the permission and it was pretty one sided.
 
Law of the land doesn't apply to Sikhs?

Or their beard is not a threat to national security?

beards and turban are the integral part of sikhs since day one , and are well accepted in armed forces in india...

beards are not part of religion for muslims , its not compulsery , but just has became a identity associated with radical fundamentalists ,....why do anyone think that armed forces in india going to allow it...
 
Oh c'mon Pakistani members! Don't troll indian hindus on this.

Muslims ruled them for 1000 years. They have some inferiority complexes so these steps are natural.
 
Oh c'mon Pakistani members! Don't troll indian hindus on this.

Muslims ruled them for 1000 years. They have some inferiority complexes so these steps are natural.

If that were the case, nobody stopped us from writing a Hindu specific constitution despite Muslims being given a separate nation. They came, they ruled and they couldn't still become majority? Enough to prove who is strong.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom