Karnataka hijab Row: Supreme Court reserves order on petitions challenging HC judgment

2 mins readComment
Anupama
Anupama Mehra
Assistant Manager – Content
Updated on Sep 22, 2022 14:44 IST

On March 15, the Karnataka High Court upheld a state government order allowing government colleges in the state to ban the wearing of hijab by Muslim girl students in educational institutions. A bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia reserved its verdict on the matter.

Karnataka hijab Row: SC reserves order on pleas challenging HC judgment

Karnataka hijab Row: Supreme Court reserves order on pleas challenging HC judgment

The Supreme Court has reserved the order on several petitions challenging Karnataka High Court upholding the ban on hijab in educational institutes. During the 10 days of the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, Karnataka's Advocate General Prabhuling K Navadgi, and Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj argued on the state's behalf, while senior lawyers Dushyant Dave and Salman Khurshid presented the views of the Muslim petitioners. A bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia reserved its verdict on the matter.

Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave while representing the Muslim appellants in the SC said, “For those who are believers it (hijab) is essential. For those who are not believers, it’s not essential.”

On March 15, the Karnataka High Court upheld a state government order allowing government colleges in the state to ban the wearing of hijab by Muslim girl students in educational institutions. Earlier, Muslim appellants who have challenged the Karnataka hijab ban told the SC that the “directive” against wearing the apparel in schools is “part of…pattern…to marginalise minority communities”.

The state government had, by its order of February 5, 2022, banned wearing clothes that disturb equality, integrity, and public order in schools and colleges.

“This is not about uniform…by series of acts of commission and acts of omission that have happened, unfortunately…I’m not blaming any individual or anything, but these acts of commission and omission show that there is a pattern to marginalise the minority communities. Part of this pattern is this directive,” senior advocate Dushyant Dave, representing some of the appellants, told a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia.

Dave referred to controversies such as “love jihad” and said, “this has to be considered in the light of the kind of atmosphere that we are seeing today, which is going far from being liberal that we have been for 5,000 years”.

Read More:

About the Author
Anupama Mehra
Assistant Manager – Content

"The pen is mightier than the sword". Anupama totally believes in this and respects what she conveys through it. She is a vivid writer, who loves to write about education, lifestyle, and governance. She is a hardcor... Read Full Bio

Comments

We use cookies to improve your experience. By continuing to browse the site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy.