Login With Google
SC stresses adverse impact of female genital mutilation
Why in the news ?
- Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra said the Constitution does not allow a person to cause injury to another.
- Female genital mutilation leaves permanent emotional and mental scars in a young girl, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud observed .
Concept
- Female genital mutilation (FGM) comprises all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.
- It is also known by other names including 'cutting', 'female circumcision' and 'initiation'.
The case
- The Supreme Court hearing the case of practicing female genital mutilation of minor girls in the Dawoodi Bohra community, saying it violates the bodily "integrity" of a girl child.
- Earlier Chief Justice Misra had said such practices on children was an offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
- Attorney General had urged the court to issue directions against the practice.
- Attorney General submitted that female genital mutilation is punished with seven years’ imprisonment.
- However, the court also hearing an application for impleading filed by the Dawoodi Bohra Women’s Association for Religious Freedom.
- 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, he said.
- However, senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, appearing for the group, had said “khafz/female circumcision as practised by the Dawoodi Bohra community is not female genital mutilation.”
- Singhvi said, It was an essential part of their religion and protected under the Constitution under article 25 and 26.
Source
The Hindu.