Amid death threats to High Court Judges who delivered Hijab Verdict, CM Bommai orders Y+ security be provided to them

Read Time: 04 minutes

The Tamil Nadu police has arrested two leaders from Tamil Nadu Thowheed Jamath (TNTJ), after videos of speeches from protest gatherings, in which they are issuing death threats to judges who delivered the Hijab Verdict began circulating. TNTJ claims to be an islamic organisation with no political affiliations.

In the speech, a person who has been recognised as S Jamal Mohammed Usmani according to The Hindu, is heard "reminding" the judges about the death of Dhanbad Judge Uttam Anand, who was knocked down by an auto while on a morning walk in July last year.

Charges of promoting enmity and intent to incite have been filed against TMTJ leader Covai R Rahmatullah and Usmani.

In the alleged video from a protest, Rahmatullah  is heard saying, “Have you forgotten the incident of last August in Jharkhand, where a judge on a morning walk was murdered for giving an anti-people judgment? Two people surrendered in the case after two days. Do you remember? Do not even think that Karnataka Muslims have accepted your judgment. If untoward things happen, let me clarify that the judges alone will be responsible.”

In another video, people were seen raising slogans against PM Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah, issuing warnings that nobody should test their patience.

Following this, Karnataka Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai ordered the state government to provide Y-category security to the three High Court judges who delivered the recent verdict in the hijab row.

Last week, a Special Bench headed by Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and consisting of Justices Krishna Dixit and JM Khazi pronounced the judgment dismissing the plea(s) challenging alleged ban on wearing the Hijab at Pre-University colleges in district Udupi.

It held that wearing Hijab was not essential religious practice of Islam and prescription of school uniform by the PU colleges is a reasonable restriction. Appeal(s) against the said judgment have been moved before the Supreme Court.