Advocate and Christian nun Sister Jasmine, who has been enrolled since 2000 with the Delhi bar council and is currently working with the Human Rights Law Network (HRLN), said she would file a complaint about other lawyers having objected to her wearing her nun’s habit with with the advocates’ band. [Indian Express]
Outgoing Bar Council of India (BCI) chairman Manan Kumar Mishra told the Indian Express that while the wearing of a “turban is not a problem” with the advocate’s uniform, a nun’s habit was not allowed.
Retired judge S N Dhingra disagreed: “Just as turbans and other religious markers are allowed in court, a habit is also not a violation” [via @mohitsingh8 on Twitter]
Comments
How is this "myopic" exactly? Do you know what myopia is?
Sorry, but how is speaking out against making a charade out of a court dress "myopic" ? You want to convert a court into a nunnery?
Even a semi-literate like you would agree that religous paraphernalia should be kept out of professional dress codes. Other than a turban for sikhs which is quite possible the only exception of its kind in the world (and which many developed nations still do not permit), there is no other instance where such blatant symbols of religion are permitted, more so in a regulated profession.
Let this nun wear whatever she wants in the privacy of her nunnery. But she has no business sullying the professional standards of the bar with her nun habit. Subjectivity aside, the BCI Rules clearly prescribe the dress code for women lawyers as follows
"Black full sleeve jacket or blouse, white collar stiff or soft, with white bands and Advocates’ Gowns. White blouse, with or without collar, with white bands and with a black open breast coat.
Or
(b) Sarees or long skirts (white or black or any mellow or subdued colour without any print or design) or flare (white, black or black stripped or grey) or Punjabi dress Churidar Kurta or Salwar-Kurta with or without dupatta (white or black) or traditional dress with black coat and bands."
Do you see a nun habit permitted ? Because I dont. Next time try reading up the rules before shooting your mouth off.
The BCI chairman is fully in the right on this one.
Or
(b) Sarees or long skirts (white or black or any mellow or subdued colour without any print or design) or flare (white, black or black stripped or grey) or Punjabi dress Churidar Kurta or Salwar-Kurta with or without dupatta (white or black) or traditional dress with black coat and bands."[/quote]
Had you read the Bar Council Rules properly, you wouldn't have shot off your mouth and made a complete foll out of yourself. I have read the rules and I clearly see that a nun is allowed to wear her habit as an advocate.
In your semi-literate layman opinion, what do you think is the purpose of specifying "traditional dress with black coat and bands" when sarees, kurta, etc. are already mentioned?
Either you do not understand the law at all, or your subjective bias has clouded your interpretation.
Or
(b) Sarees or long skirts (white or black or any mellow or subdued colour without any print or design) or flare (white, black or black stripped or grey) or Punjabi dress Churidar Kurta or Salwar-Kurta with or without dupatta (white or black) or traditional dress with black coat and bands."[/quote]
Had you read the Bar Council Rules properly, you wouldn't have shot off your mouth and made a complete foll out of yourself. I have read the rules and I clearly see that a nun is allowed to wear her habit as an advocate.
[/quote]
Lucky for lawyer, clients and the public that interpretation of dress codes for advocates in not upto the folks like you than.
Going by your view, even a bikini could be worn to court.
Feel free to write some shady reply below.
Dude, if you think habit:nunnery = shoe:shoeshop your reasoning skills need a lot of work.
are you from a firm which has Well Being Das in the middle ? your logic seems like that ..lawyers of AM...
Ashamed to share the bar with bigots.
To meet BCI's avowed objective of stopping Nuns, who are advocates, from wearing a habit to court.
[i]Advocates appearing in the Supreme Court, High Courts, Subordinate Courts, Tribunals or Authorities shall wear the following as part of their dress which shall be sober and dignified.
1. Advocates
(a) A black buttoned up coat, chapkan, achkan, black sherwani and white bands with Advocates’ Gowns.
(b) A black open breast coat. white shirt, white collar, stiff or soft, and white bands with Advocates’ Gowns.
In either cases wear long trousers (white, black striped or grey), [u][b]Dhoti[/b][/u] excluding Jeans.[/i]
Clearly, dhoti (loincloth) with coat, band and gown is permitted.
[i]Advocates appearing in the Supreme Court, High Courts, Subordinate Courts, Tribunals or Authorities shall wear the following as part of their dress which shall be sober and dignified.
1. Advocates
(a) A black buttoned up coat, chapkan, achkan, black sherwani and white bands with Advocates’ Gowns.
(b) A black open breast coat. white shirt, white collar, stiff or soft, and white bands with Advocates’ Gowns.
In either cases wear long trousers (white, black striped or grey), [u][b]Dhoti[/b][/u] excluding Jeans.[/i]
Clearly, dhoti (loincloth) with coat, band and gown is permitted.[/quote]
You're calling a dhoti a "loincloth" ??? Dude, is this your knowledge of Indian culture ??
Having said that I do not believe what he has said is wrong, if one simply goes by the text of what he has said. It is because equating a sikh turban with a habit is improper.
Please understand that for a sikh it is imperative that he grow his hair and cover it with a turban. It is an essential element of that religion(it is immaterial that some follow it and some don't).
However, a habit is not an essential element for a christian, not even female Christians. It is only mandatory requirement for nuns. Therefore,I don't see how that should be allowed.
A better comparison would be between a Sikh turban and a hizab. This is because under Islam women are supposed to cover their heads, and if someone wishes to cover her heard while in court that should be allowed.