· Female genital mutilation leaves permanent emotional and mental scars in a young girl, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud observed.
· Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra said the Constitution does not allow a person to cause injury to another.
· Mr. Singhvi, appearing for 70,000 Bohra Muslim women who are in favour of the practice, argued that the practice was essential to religion and has continued since the 10th century.
· Justice Chandrachud responded that the court has to test it in the light of constitutional morality. Just because something is “essential”, does not mean it is above constitutional morality.
· The court is hearing a PIL filed by advocate Sunita Tiwari to ban female genital mutilation practised by some communities as a religious practice
· Senior advocate Indira Jaising submitted that the practice cannot be considered “essential” in religion as it can be brought under the ambit of the POCSO Act.
Source : The Hindu