Hijab Ban : No Religious Dress In Colleges During Pendency Of Case, Says Karnataka High Court| LIVE UPDATES [Day 3]

Kamat : We have authoritative judicial interpretation on Islamic law, of course from a neighbouring high court.

The ERP is to be seen from the standpoint of a believer.

"It is, thus, seen from the reported material that there is almost unanimity amongst Muslim scholars that purdah is not essential but covering of head by scarf is obligatory", Kamat quotes from the Madras HC decision Ajmal Khan case.

Kamat says he has also placed a Madras HC decision in Ajmal Khan case which says head scarf is essential Islamic practice.

Kamat refers to Verse 24.31 of Holy Quran. The prescription of head scarf  is specifically prescribed in Holy Quran, he says.

Kamat refers to the third judgment cited in the GO- a Madras HC judgment. He says that judgment was in a case where uniform was imposed for teachers and Article 25 was not in issue in that case, as the issue was power to prescribe uniform for teachers.

Kamat refers to the next judgment cited in the GO. He says it was in the context of an all girls school and in that context HC said wearing hijab was not necessary.

Kamat: After discussing the sources of Islamic law including the Holy Quran and Hadith that it is a farz to cover the head.

Kamat refers to the earlier judgment of Kerala HC which held Hijab to be essential practice in the AIPMT Case.

CJ : To subserve the larger interest of the society they have considered this judgement. What wrong have they done?

Kamat says the judgment was in the context of a private institution.

CJ : Private institutions are also under the Constitution. General law applies even to them.

Kamat explains that the Kerala HC, in that case, spoke about balancing individual rights with institutional rights.

Chief Justice asks what is the wrong done by Govt by referring to this judgment in the GO?