Order to allow Sikhs to carry kirpan in domestic flights policy decision: Delhi HC

On Article 25 of the Constitution, the HC said it gives “every person the right to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion subject to public order, morality, and health”. It was noted that the explanation to the Article specifically clarified that “wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion”. The HC said, “It is well settled that courts while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, do not sit as an appellate authority over policy decisions. It is also well settled that the scope of interference in the matter of policy decisions is extremely limited and that courts must restrain from interfering in the matter of policy decisions unless there is a categorical infringement of fundamental rights”.

The HC emphasised that the Supreme Court has warned time and again that courts must resist the “temptation to usurp the power of the executive by entering into arenas which are exclusively within the domain of the executive” and that courts should not interfere in the “day-to-day functioning” of the government departments or statutory bodies.

The HC examined an April 2005 circular of the Bureau of Civil Aviation which permitted the carrying of kirpan by Sikh travellers while travelling by air within India on the conditions that the length of the blade does not exceed 15.24 cm (6 inches) and the total length of a kirpan should not be more than 22.86 cm (9 inches). The circular further restricted the carrying of the kirpan only to travelling on India aircraft within India. The circular was adopted into the notification under challenge.

The HC further examined the reply filed by the Director General, Bureau of Civil Aviation Security, to the plea and said that the reply shows that adequate precautionary and security measures are being taken by the Centre to ensure the safety of passengers, crew, aircraft, ground personnel and the general public. “This court is, therefore, not inclined to entertain the instant PIL,” the HC said.

Apart from challenging the notification, the petitioner had sought the constitution of an “Empowered Working Committee” (EWC) to come up with a workable solution to ensure that the “sanctity of religious expression of the carriage of kirpans on the person in public places is suitably protected by carriage of an appropriately designed and crafted kirpans”. The petitioner, a lawyer, had sought that the measurement of the kirpan should not be more than 4 cm in blade length and similar hilt to disable a firm hand grip and should not have any sharp edges.

The petitioner had claimed that the exemption granted to Sikh passengers completely disregarded the safety of passengers and other laws in the country. He claimed that carrying kirpan is not only dangerous but against international aviation conventions. It was claimed that “no religion can expect state patronage and cannot be endowed with any particular concessions to the exclusion or in preference to all others, and no citizen can claim any entitlement or any preferential treatment”, as was noted in the judgment.