A new decision by jewellery traders in Bihar has triggered a political and social debate after customers wearing face coverings were asked to reveal their identity before purchasing jewellery.
Under the new rule, customers entering jewellery shops with hijab, niqab, burqa, scarf, or helmets will be required to uncover their faces for identification purposes before being allowed to proceed with any purchase.
Why the Rule Was Introduced
The decision was announced by the All India Jewellers and Gold Federation (AIGJF), which cited security concerns as the primary reason.
According to the federation:
-
The rule applies equally to men and women
-
It aims to prevent robberies, fraud, and identity concealment
-
Rising gold and silver prices have increased security risks for traders
Jewellers say the measure is intended to protect both customers and shop owners amid a rise in theft-related incidents.
Political Reaction and Criticism
The move has drawn criticism from the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD).
Party spokesperson Ijaz Ahmed strongly condemned the decision, calling it unconstitutional and accusing traders of targeting religious practices under the guise of security.
He argued that:
-
Religious freedom is being compromised
-
The decision hurts Muslim sentiments
-
The policy reflects a broader ideological agenda
The RJD has demanded that the restriction be withdrawn immediately.
Jewellers Defend the Decision
Responding to the criticism, Ashok Kumar Verma, President of the Bihar Jewellers Federation, clarified that:
-
Bihar is the first Indian state to implement such a rule statewide
-
The decision is purely security-driven
-
No religion or community is being targeted
-
Customers will be politely requested, not forced, to cooperate
He added that the sharp increase in precious metal prices has made jewellery stores more vulnerable to crime.
Police Support
Local police authorities have also supported the decision, stating that visible identification inside high-value retail environments can help deter criminal activity and ensure public safety.
Ongoing Debate
While traders insist the rule is necessary for safety, critics argue it risks blurring the line between security measures and personal freedoms. The issue continues to fuel debate across political and social circles in the state.
