What Tksji and Rajji said makes most sense. This op was posted in GD section. We can not assume that this posting is necessarily of religious significance.
It is widely believed that according to the Hindu tradition, every male Hindu is required to wear a sikha. There are, however, no authentic scriptural injunctions that dictate that this must be observed. Erudite Hindu pundits and Shastris, when pressed to cite scriptural evidence to bear out this belief, are unable to give anything on the point from the Vedas. Often, they rely on the allusion to it found in the Manu Smriti (ii : 27) —
“By oblations to fire during the mother’s pregnancy, by holy rites on the birth of the child, by the tonsure of his head with a lock of hair left on it, by the ligation of the sacrificial cord are the birth taints of the three classes wholly removed.”
But what about the myth that the Hare Krsnas have propagated that “the sikha” allows God to pull one to heaven, or from this material world of Maya?
This myth has no backing either in the Srimad Bhagavatam nor in any puranic literature. It is their founder archarya’s instructions to His followers.
This belief, i.e., the sikha “allows God to easily pull one to paradise” may, in fact, be an Islamic (or at least an Arabian) superstition:
Islamic Concoctions
Sir Thomas Herbert, 1st Baronet (1606–1682) described a similar hairstyle worn by Persians in his book ‘Travels in Persia’:
“The Persians allow no part of their body hair except the upper lip, which they wear long and thick and turning downwards; as also a lock upon the crown of the head, by which they are made to believe their Prophet will at Resurrection lift them into paradise. Elsewhere their head is shaven or made incapable of hair by the oil dowae (daway) being thrice anointed. This had been made the mode of the Oriental people since the promulgation of the alcoran (Al Quran), introduced and first imposed by the Arabians.”
Sikha and Hinduism | Antaryamin's Blog