Karnataka hijab ban: Supreme Court last week issued notice to the state government on petitions (File)
New Delhi:
A person has the right to practice religion, but the question is whether it can be taken to a school with prescribed uniform, the Supreme Court said on Monday while hearing a case related to the hijab ban in educational institutions in Karnataka.
Hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Karnataka High Court’s decision refusing to lift the ban on hijab in educational institutions in the state, the Supreme Court asked whether a student can wear a hijab in a school where a uniform is prescribed. Has been.
The bench said, “You may have a religious right to practice whatever you want to practice. But can you practice and take the right in a school which has uniform as part of the dress? This The question will be there.” Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia.
The Supreme Court questioned senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, who was arguing for some of the petitioners.
On the argument that the hijab ban may deprive women of education, the bench said the state was not saying that it was denying any rights. It said, ‘What the state is saying is that you come in a uniform which is prescribed for students…’
Shri Hegde underlined how the Supreme Court in this case would have an impact on the education of a large section of the society. He also referred to the provisions of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) KM Natraj said the issue is very limited and it pertains to discipline in educational institutions.
When the court asked him “how is there a violation of discipline in school if a girl wears a hijab?”, the ASG said, “One cannot say under the guise of his religious practice or religious right that I am entitled to do so.” That’s why I want to violate school discipline.”
Karnataka’s Advocate General, Prabhulinga Navadgi referred to the state government’s order dated February 5, 2022, by which it had banned the wearing of clothes that disturbed equality, integrity and public order in schools and colleges, which some Muslim girls have seen as high was challenged in court. ,
Mr Navadgi argued that it was not the state but the educational institutions concerned that prescribed the uniform.
During the debate that continued on 7 September, he said, “This order of the government does not interfere with any rights of the students.”
Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing in the matter, referred to Article 145(3) of the Constitution and said that it is a matter of great importance. The Article deals with the minimum number of judges required to decide any important question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.
When asked whether wearing hijab is a necessary practice under Article 25 of the Constitution, the bench said, “The issue may be amended in a slightly different manner. It may be necessary, it may not be necessary.” “
“What we are saying is whether you can insist on carrying on your religious practice in a government institution. Because the Preamble says that our country is a secular country,” the bench said.
Mr Dhawan said that the issue raised before the court pertains to lakhs of women, who follow the dress code in educational institutions but also want to wear hijab.
“What this court will rule, the whole world will listen,” he said, adding that the Supreme Court’s decision in the matter would be important.
During the arguments, the bench observed that if the Karnataka Education Act does not permit to prescribe dress code, then the question will be whether the Act prohibits dress code.
“Can students come in mini, midis, whatever they want,” the bench said.
Shri Hegde said that the executive power of the State cannot infringe on the Fundamental Rights.
The Supreme Court had last week issued notice to the Karnataka government on these petitions.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Karnataka, had submitted that the matter involved a question of law and no reply was required to be filed.
Several petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court against the March 15 decision of the Karnataka High Court, which held that wearing hijab is not a part of the essential religious practice that can be protected under Article 25 of the Constitution.
The High Court had dismissed petitions by a section of Muslim students of the Government Pre-University Girls College, Udupi, seeking permission to wear the hijab inside the classroom. The High Court had held that the fixation of school uniforms is only a reasonable restriction, constitutionally permissible, to which students cannot object.
In a petition filed in the Supreme Court, the petitioner said that the High Court had “erred in creating a dichotomy of freedom of religion and freedom of conscience, in which the court has concluded that those who practice religion do not have the right to conscience”. “The High Court has failed to note that the right to wear the hijab falls within the purview of the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that freedom of conscience is a part of the right to privacy. is a part.” Said it.
Challenging the government’s February 5 order, the petitioners had argued before the high court that wearing Islamic headscarfs was an innocent practice of faith and an essential religious practice (ERP) and not a display of religious bigotry.
(Except for the title, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)