SC says will list pleas against Karnataka HC hijab verdict after Holi vacations

The student's counsel informed the apex court that there was an urgency since examinations are approaching.
An angled view of the Supreme Court
An angled view of the Supreme Court
Written by:
Published on

The Supreme Court on Wednesday, March 16, said it will list after Holi vacations two students’ petitions against the Karnataka High Court verdict that held that the hijab is not an essential part of Islam, so students cannot be allowed to wear it inside classrooms. Senior advocate Sanjay Hegde on Wednesday morning sought an urgent hearing of the Karnataka student petitioner’s plea. The urgency is that there are many girls who have to appear in examinations, the senior lawyer told the apex court.

A bench comprising Chief Justice NV Ramana, Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Hima Kohli took note of the submissions.  “Let us see...we will list after the vacations. Give us time,” the CJI said. The Supreme Court will be on Holi vacation from March 17, Thursday, to March 20, Sunday. 

Two petitions have been filed against the Karnataka High Court’s full-bench verdict on the case in which it was held that wearing the hijab is not a part of essential religious practice for Muslim women in Islamic faith under Article 25 of the Constitution. The high court dismissed the petitions filed by a section of Muslim students from the Government Pre-University Girls College in Udupi, seeking permission to wear the hijab inside the classroom.

The High Court held the prescription of a school uniform is only a reasonable restriction to the fundamental right, which is constitutionally permissible, and which the students cannot object to. A  bench of Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi said that schools can prescribe a uniform and that the Karnataka government order of February 5 order on dress code in classrooms is valid. The HC said that the petitioners’ pleas against the hijab ban are ‘devoid of merit’ and so are not maintainable.

Shortly after this verdict, a special leave petition was filed in the Supreme Court against this order. A synopsis of the plea states that the Karnataka High Court in its order has “vehemently failed to apply its mind” and “was unable to understand the gravity of the situation, as well as the core aspect of the Essential Religious Practices enshrined under Article 25 of the Constitution of India.” 

Related Stories

No stories found.
The News Minute
www.thenewsminute.com