Hijab Ban- Supreme Court Hearing- DAY-8 Live Updates

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

20 Sept 2022 10:15 AM IST

  • Hijab Ban- Supreme Court Hearing- DAY-8 Live Updates

    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.

    The SLPs have been filed against the judgment dated March 15 passed DAY 6by 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.

    LIVE UPDATES- DAY 2

    LIVE UPDATES- DAY 3

    LIVE UPDATES- DAY 4

    LIVE UPDATES- DAY 5

    LIVE UPDATES- DAY 6

    LIVE UPDATES- DAY 7

    FOLLOW LIVE UPDATES OF TODAY'S HEARING HERE:

    Live Updates

    • 20 Sept 2022 11:47 AM IST

      Dave : Young Lawyers case (Sabarimala) was an opposite case, it was a case where the right of women to enter temple was prevented on certain tenets...

    • 20 Sept 2022 11:44 AM IST

      Justice Gupta : The reasoning appears to be if the essential religious practice violates constitutional rights, it cannot be protected.

      Dave : Article 25 itself say that.

    • 20 Sept 2022 11:44 AM IST

      Justice Dhulia : What is the meaning of this (HC observations) that a person seeking refuge under Article 25 he must show it is an essential religious practice and its engagement with constitutional morality?

    • 20 Sept 2022 11:43 AM IST

      Dave : Normally, the practice is if a judgment is before larger bench, lordships will not touch the judgment.

    • 20 Sept 2022 11:43 AM IST

      Dave : It is a completely incorrect conclusion by the High Court relying on some out of context lines from Young Lawyers. And even if assuming HC is right, Young Lawyers is pending review.

    • 20 Sept 2022 11:43 AM IST

      Dave : The learned judge(Karnataka HC) has completely ignored the Shirur Mutt judgment principles..

    • 20 Sept 2022 11:40 AM IST

      Dave : High Court has singularly referred on Young Lawyers decision (Sabarimala case) and the case has been expressly referred to 9-judge.

      Justice Gupta : The review has been referred, the judgment is good law.

      Dave : Right. There is no stay

    • 20 Sept 2022 11:39 AM IST

      Dave : Article 25 is clear and the Constituent Assembly debates cement that conclusion.

    • 20 Sept 2022 11:39 AM IST

      Justice Gupta : Again my question is, the Constituent Assembly had 240 members, each member represents one opinion..can it be taken as a collective view? We have to go by the adopt by the definition finally given by the Constitution...

    • 20 Sept 2022 11:38 AM IST

      Dave quotes from Kesavananda Bharti - it was held Constituent Assembly Debates, though not conclusive, can throw light on the intention.

      Refers to another precedent saying CAD can be looked into,

    Next Story