Karnataka Hijab Row: Hearing To Resume In HC; Here Are The Highlights From Yesterday's Hearing

Amid the ongoing Hijab controversy, the Karnataka High Court, on Monday (14 February), resumed hearing petitions challenging the “hijab ban” in educational institutions. The three-judge bench, comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi, will continue hearing the matter today, Tuesday (15 February).

Karnataka government to issue SOP for educational institutions

Karnataka Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai will hold a meeting with Education Minister BC Nagesh to decide on the SOP to operate schools and colleges without any religious garments till the high court delivers a verdict on the hijab row. “Karnataka High Court has given directions and everyone should follow. My request to students is to follow the high court order,” said Bommai, reports India Today.

Ban on Hijab violates Article 25, says petitioners

Senior Advocate Dev Datt Kamat, while appearing for the petitioners, submitted before the Karnataka High Court that the government’s order (‘ban on hijab’) on 5 February, resulted from non-application of mind and. “The government order is in the teeth of Article 25 and it is not legally sustainable," argued Kamat.

Kamat said that the Quran says it is the “farz” (religious duty) of the students to wear a hijab. “Students are seeking to wear hijab of the same color as their uniform,” proposed Kamat. On this, the bench questioned Kamat whether everything written in the Quran is a religious tenet.

To allow CDC to decide on Hijab is illegal

During the hearing, Kamat, citing the example of Kendriya Vidyalayas, questioned that when wearing hijab is allowed in central schools, why it is not allowed in state government schools? Kamat told the court that allowing the College Development Committee (CDC) to decide whether to allow Muslim students to wear headscarves or not is totally illegal.

"Today, what is it that stops the state from permitting me to exercise religious freedom? They say public order… Muslim girls wearing headscarves are not hurting anyone,” argued Kamat. “The only restriction that can be imposed under Article 25 is public order, which can only be imposed by the state,” he added.

He further said “Where is the law on the basis of which the hijab has been banned.” He argued that a CDC has no statutory basis and hence it does not pass muster to regulate public order. Kamat told the court that the government order states that the issue of wearing a headscarf (hijab) is not covered under Article 25. And thus, it should be left to the CDC to decide whether or not to accept it as a part of the uniform.

State cannot say wearing hijab is essential practice or not

The petitioned also cited the hijab mandate in schools in Malaysia to propose that hijab is essential to Islam. To this, the High Court questioned: “Is Malaysia secular or Islamic? Is there any order from any other court in any country taking a divergent view?”.

“The state is an outside authority. It cannot say that wearing a headscarf is essential practice or not. It has to be seen from the viewpoint of a believer,” argued Kamat on the Muslim girls of the Udupi college.

HC requests media to cover the issue sensibly

Advocate Mohammed Tahir also mentioned that the personal details of the petitioners are being displayed in the media and that he wanted directions against the media. “We request the media to cover the issue sensibly,” the High Court advised.