A Supreme Court judge, Justice Hemant Gupta, while listening to a petition on the Hijab Case said, if the right to dress is a fundamental right then the right to undress also becomes a fundamental right.
[Hijab case] If you say right to dress is fundamental right then right to undress also becomes fundamental right: Supreme Court to petitioner— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) September 7, 2022
report by @DebayonRoy
Read more here: https://t.co/2dOh2IawlU pic.twitter.com/XN3MHidJ8N
This statement came after the petitioner’s counsel, Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat, cited the 2014 NALSA judgment of the Supreme Court to contend that right to dress is recognised as a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a).
We cannot take this to illogical ends.. if you say right to dress is a fundamental right then right to undress also becomes a fundamental right.
Justice Gupta’s statement didn’t really land well with the general public, and people took to Twitter to point out how the logic behind the statement itself is flawed, citing different variations of the same logic.
What kind of argument is it?— Dheeraj (@dmk18572) September 7, 2022
Can the fundamental “right to equality” be interpreted as the “right to inequality”!
Ths argument of the court seems like a school going kid. Right to dress is something that will not harm the society in general but the right to undress will cause social disruption so the court needs to understand diff between right which is not harmful to the society and wish is— CA Prashant D’Mello (@PrashantMello) September 7, 2022
If Right to live is fundamental then right to die also becomes fundamental.— kone (@iqtelaaf) September 7, 2022
“If you say right to eat is fundamental right, then right to vomit is also fundamental right. So if you allow eating on the table, allow vomiting on table as well “— Nadir Cazi (@nadircazi) September 7, 2022
At this point of time Judicial reform is more essential than any reform 🙏🙏— Facts check (@Facts_chek) September 7, 2022
They should go to school again to learn. https://t.co/OgvJCUl6O4— Ekramul Haque (@Ekramul59563950) September 8, 2022
Then, right to life could be interpreted as right to kill and take a life.— raaj (@yuveraaaj) September 8, 2022
Right to dress ≠ right to undress
Because, a person dresses up, with their own money, body parts and clothings. Is anyone else involved? No !
when u undress someone, you’re invading another person! https://t.co/aNKZwkdDBt
We are touching new levels of absurd every single day. Right to learn means right to unlearn? Right to livelihood would mean right to unemployment?— Mahima Pandey (@LegalPandey) September 7, 2022
Not everything will turn around and make sense like Right to be Forgotten under Jorawar Singh Mundy v UOI. https://t.co/Ia0hBCVjOo
How low will we as a society stoop down? https://t.co/6BIqczGaUv— Ayush Shukla (@_ayoushshukla_) September 7, 2022
Excuse me..what? Please tell me this is out of context. https://t.co/ldtmEDcZ5F— Tapasya (@tapasyatanudash) September 7, 2022
Yes, please tell us this was out of context?