Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia will hear a batch of petitions challenging the ban on wearing Hijab in educational institutions in Karnataka.A batch of 23 petitions is listed before the bench. Some of them are writ petitions filed directly before the Supreme Court seeking the right to wear hijab for Muslim girl students. Some others are special...
Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia will hear a batch of petitions challenging the ban on wearing Hijab in educational institutions in Karnataka.
A batch of 23 petitions is listed before the bench. Some of them are writ petitions filed directly before the Supreme Court seeking the right to wear hijab for Muslim girl students. Some others are special leave petitions which challenge the judgment of the Karnataka High Court dated March 15 which upheld the hijab ban.
So far, the bench has heard Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat for the petitioners who argued that the Government Order, banning Hijabs in educational institutions violates students' fundamental rights under Article 19, 21 and 25 of the Constitution.
During the course of hearing, the bench has also raised several queries like whether religious clothing can be worn in a government run institution in a secular country. The bench also asked the counsels whether if it is held that freedom of expression includes the freedom to dress, would it also include the freedom to undress?
The SLPs has been filed against the judgment dated March 15 passed by the High Court of Karnataka, upholding Government Order dated 05.02.2022, which has effectively prohibited Petitioners, and other such female Muslim students from wearing the headscarf in their Pre-University Colleges. A Full Bench of the High Court comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna Dixit and Justice JM Khazi held that wearing of hijab by women was not an essential religious practice of Islam. The Bench further held the prescription of uniform dress code in educational institutions was not violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioners.
FOLLOW LIVE UPDATES HERE:
Hearing concludes for today. To continue on Wednesday at 11.30 AM.
Khurshid : One of my clients is a Sikh lady, some of them have started wearing Turbans and issue may arise for them too.
Khurshid : The judgment of Karnataka HC has got many things right but in its application has got many things wrong.
Khurshid : The verse "no compulsion in religion" must be read along with the verse "for you your faith, for me my faith". The no- compulsion is against another faith.
Khurshid referring to Quran verses of punishment for disobedience
Khurshid : The question raised was since Quran says God is merciful, whether hijab was mandatory. Quran describes God as merciful, forgiving, loving. But there are provisions for rewards for those who obey and punishments for those who don't, but its all in after life
Khurshid : When we visited Gurudwara, we immediately covered our head, with a handkerchief at least. Interestingly, there is a debate when you go to a mosque should you cover your head. In Saudi it is not done, but in Indian tradition it is.
Khurshid : Ghoonghat is considered very essential for women in parts of Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, when they go out.
Khurshid : We will not say uniform must be dispensed with. But there is something in addition with the uniform which should be permitted.
Khurshid quotes from Puttaswamy judgment: Choice of apparel and appearance is also an aspect of privacy