Tuesday, May 21, 2024
HomeNewsLatest Legal NewsNotice dropped by the Pune court asking female attorneys not to style...

Notice dropped by the Pune court asking female attorneys not to style their hair in court

The Pune District Court has withdrawn its request that female attorneys refrain from having their hair done while in court because it “disturbs functioning.” The announcement was made on October 23rd, a Saturday.

On October 20, the Pune District Court sent out a notice requesting that the female attorneys refrain from having their hair styled in the public courtroom. According to the notice, this woman’s behaviour was interfering with the court’s ability to function. “It is mostly  observed that female attorneys are styling hair in open court, which disturbs the court’s operation. According to the warning, it is advised that women’s rights advocates avoid doing so.

Senior attorney Indira Jaising reacted strongly to the court’s decision by saying, “Wow, now look! Who and why are women’s rights campaigners a distraction? The court also slammed Nimisha Jaiswal, a journalist, for the notice. “Ladies, you hold the power to obstruct justice with your hands or hair?

Tanvi Dubey, a Supreme Court attorney, states, “The Bar Council of India has established a dress code for attorneys, with additional requirements for female attorneys. There is no need for a sub-order because those regulations are obeyed. This was a careless choice. Will men be subject to the same regulations? “

In a similar event that occurred in February of this year, Justice Rekha Palli was addressed as “sir” multiple times while she was in the Delhi High Court hearing a case. However, Justice Palli was keen to silence the attorney who was making this remark about her nevertheless.

Justice Palli allegedly said, “I am not Sir. I really hope you can see that. The lawyer then expressed regret, but the internet community did not appreciate his justification. He said that the “chair” she was seated in was the reason he made the error. Then, in an enraged response, Justice Palli said that the lawyer’s assertion that the Chair is solely for “Sirs” made the situation worse. She questioned him about what hope could be held for the future if the younger members were unwilling to stop the differentiation.

Ahir Mitra
Ahir Mitra

Most Popular

Recent Comments