Plea challenges permission to Sikhs to carry kirpan on domestic flights: Delhi HC reserves verdict
While hearing the PIL, a division bench observed that this was a policy decision of the central government that “ought not to be interfered with by the court” unless it is “arbitrary”.
The plea claims that the State has a solemn duty to make laws prohibiting, regulating, or suitably restricting the carriage of kirpans in situations where the carriage may expose others to grave risks of bodily injury and death as well as loss and damage to public/private property. (Wikimedia Commons/Hari Singh) The Delhi High Court Thursday reserved orders in a plea challenging the Centre’s March notification allowing Sikh passengers to carry kirpans on domestic flights.
While hearing the public interest litigation, a division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that this was a policy decision of the central government that “ought not to be interfered with by the court” unless it is “arbitrary”. The HC further said that the government had applied their mind and came up with this policy.
The petitioner, a practising lawyer, said that while he does not contest the freedom to profess and practise religion under Article 25 of the Constitution, he did seek the constitution of a committee of stakeholders to examine the issue. “If the committee feels that the notification is good, so be it,” the petitioner said.
The plea claims that the State has a solemn duty to make laws prohibiting, regulating, or suitably restricting the carriage of kirpans in situations where the carriage may expose others to grave risks of bodily injury and death as well as loss and damage to public/private property. It states that Article 25 carries an express qualification that “nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political, or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice”.
On Article 25, the plea further contends that State and its instrumentalities must balance all conflicting interests in the exercise of such freedom. The plea states that religious freedom must cede precedence to laws and regulations for preserving public safety and property security.
The petitioner also contends that “who is a Sikh is indeterminate”. It further states that notification is bad in law, being contrary to civil aviation safety protocols and international conventions. It states that the notification has been promulgated without application of mind and has brushed aside safety concerns given the “historical lessons in aviation hijackings”.
The plea further states that while notification provides a limitation on the length of the blade (15.24cm/six inches) where the total length of the kirpan should not exceed 22.86 cm(nine inches), including the hilt length of three inches. It is, however, silent on the maximum width and thickness of the blade. “Elementary physics teaches that a blade with narrow width at the base is less lethal compared to thicker broader bases tapering to the tips. Hence, the greater the thickness and width at the base, the greater the lethality,” the plea states.
Share
