Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing (Day 11)- LIVE UPDATES

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

25 Feb 2022 9:10 AM GMT

  • Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing (Day 11)- LIVE UPDATES

    Karnataka High Court Full Bench will continue hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the hijab ban in educational institutions.The matter is before a bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi will hear the petitions today at 2.30 PM.On Monday, Chief Justice sought a clarification from the State regarding its stand on banning hijab....

    Karnataka High Court Full Bench will continue hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the hijab ban in educational institutions.

    The matter is before a bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi will hear the petitions today at 2.30 PM.
    On Monday, Chief Justice sought a clarification from the State regarding its stand on banning hijab. This arose in view of the AG's submission that the Government Order dated February 5, which has been challenged in the writ petitions, does not prescribe any ban on hijab and that it is only an ""innocuous" order which asks students to follow the uniforms prescribed by their institutions.
    During one of the previous hearing, the High Court clarified that the interim order passed by it on February 10, which prohibited wearing of religious dresses by students in classrooms, will apply to both degree colleges and Pre-University (PU) Colleges, where uniform has been prescribed.
    Yesterday, Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat made his rejoinder arguments for Muslim girl students, challenging the action of a government PU college in denying their entry for wearing a hijab (headscarf). Kamat argued that people who want to wear head scarf are denied right to education on the pretext of this GO. "Their right to education which is paramount is being put on back burner. As a state you should facilitate and create an enabling atmosphere."
    Opposing State's submissions on the aspect of Constitutional Morality, Kamat added that Sabarimala and Navtej Johar judgments that were cited by the Advocate General are "pro-choice" judgments. "Constitutional morality is pro-choice. It is a restriction on state power," he said.
    Yesterday, the Court also heard Senior Advocate AM Dar for students of another college who were denied entry. It also heard Senior Advocate Guru Krishnakumar for the Respondents.
    FOLLOW THE LIVE UPDATES HERE

    Live Updates

    • 25 Feb 2022 9:20 AM GMT

      Mucchala refers to Justice Nariman's judgment in Sabarimala case : "The Court should take a common sensical view (on what is essential practice)".

      We are only keeping a piece of cloth. Therefore lordhsips may not go into these questions of what is hijab, abay, khimar,ghoongat

    • 25 Feb 2022 9:18 AM GMT

      Muchhala: The thing is even hadits also shows that face need not be covered but hijab should be worn. There is enough religions traditions, govt has admitted this in their reply.

    • 25 Feb 2022 9:16 AM GMT

      Mucchala quotes scholar Mohammed Pictkhall to say true Islamic tradition requires veiling of the head. This is quoted with approval by the State in its reply.

    • 25 Feb 2022 9:16 AM GMT

      Muchhala : Our stand is that ERP is not necessary so far as considering my plea, but if court feels ERP is required to be considered then I fully support Mr Kamats submissions.

    • 25 Feb 2022 9:16 AM GMT

      Muchhala : If it is a bonafide practice of conscience, it should be allowed under Art 25. It is not necessary to consider if it is essential religious practice or not.

      CJ : We remember your argument. Please don't repeat.

      Muchhala : I am just reminding.

    • 25 Feb 2022 9:15 AM GMT

      Muchhala : We have been wearing head scarf, it is a piece of cloth covering the head not the face, it should be permitted to use it. It is not right for college to prevent us from doing that.

    • 25 Feb 2022 9:12 AM GMT

      Mucchala points out that the petitioners have not sought for a general declaratory relief and have sought for quashing of the GO and permission for them to attend classes with hijab.

    • 25 Feb 2022 9:11 AM GMT

      Sr Adv Yusuf Muchhala seeks to make his rejoinder.

      Muchhala : Mr.Kamat has made exhaustive reply to learned AG and other senior counsels. We fully support what has been said by him. I just want to add a few things. I will be brief.

    • 25 Feb 2022 9:10 AM GMT

      CJ : We have to get up early. We will rise at 4PM. So please finish by then.

    Next Story