The Kashmir Dialogues
tenure of service. Additionally, it was pointed out that the cancellation of permission was done by the orders of the Home Department and The DGP of Mumbai which cannot be flouted.
The High Court dismissed the petition on the grounds that the petitioner was unable to establish that keeping a beard was a fundamental tenet of Islam which could not be done away with.
“The learned counsel for the petitioner could not place before us any piece of evidence demonstrating that keeping beard is a funda- mental tenet of Islam or the right of the petitioner to keep beard having any basis under any statutory legislation or guidelines of binding nature.”
The Court observed that in light of the reasonable restrictions under Article 25, the right to keep a beard cannot be considered as an absolute right for the petitioner. The Court stressed that the maintenance of a secular nature of the police force has to be adhered to when considering reasonable restrictions.
“8. The role of Police has to be appreciated in judging the restrictions governing the force. Law enforcement rests appreciably on the police. It must have a secular image and cannot lend itself to denominational nuances or overtones, more so, when national integration and secular concepts should be in the forefront. A ‘uniformed force’ which connotes a superior discipline cannot don sectarian appearances as Hindus, Muslims and such like. “The Court should take a common sense view and be actuated by considerations of practical necessary” (Adelaide Co. v. Common Wealth, 67 CLR 116 – Latham C.J) In situations like communal riots, identifiability of police force in terms of their religious denominations, will defeat the object of policing itself.”
Sheikh Sameer
