Karnataka Hijab row: Supreme Court gives split verdict; refers case to a larger bench including CJI

Karnataka Hijab row: Supreme Court gives split verdict; refers case to a larger bench including CJI

Justice Hemant Gupta dismissed the appeals while Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia set aside the Karnataka High Court order and quashed the government order which banned the hijab. Both noted that in view of divergence, it was best if a larger bench heard the matter.

FPJ Web DeskUpdated: Friday, October 28, 2022, 07:03 PM IST
article-image
Karnataka Hijab row: Supreme Court | File

The Supreme Court prnounced a split verdict in the hijab row. Justice Hemant Gupta pronouncing the verdict said, "There is divergent of opinion."

Justice Gupta, dismissing the appeals and upholding Karnataka High Court's verdict said, "In my order, I have framed 11 questions. First is whether the appeal should be referred to a constitutional bench. I have answered all the questions against the appeals. I am proposing to dismiss the appeals."

Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia has set aside the Karnataka High Court order and has quashed the state government order which banned hijab in educational institutions.

Justice Dhulia said: "By asking the girls to take off their hijab before they enter the school gates, is first an invasion of their privacy, then it is an attack on their dignity, and then ultimately it is a denial to them of secular education. These are clearly violative of Article 19(1)(a), Article 21 and Article 25(1) of the Constitution".

"It is a matter of choice, nothing more and nothing less," Justice Dhulia said.

"A girl child in areas does household work and chores before going to school and are we making her life any better by doing this? I have respectfully differed. this was a case only dealing with Article 19, and 25," says Justice Dhulia.

The case will be referred to a larger bench, the Supreme Court said.

"In light of the divergence of opinion, the matter has to be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate directions," the bench of Justice Gupta and Justice Dhulia said.

The case will thus be referred to a three-judge bench comprising the Chief Justice of India UU Lalit.

The Karnataka government has said that they will be waiting for the final verdict.

Arguments in the case

The arguments in the case that continued for 10 days, involved 21 lawyers from the petitioner's side and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, Karnataka Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi argued for the respondents.

The apex court heard several pleas against the Karnataka HC's judgment upholding the state administration's decision to direct educations institutions to prescribe uniforms.

While addressing the court, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, representing the petitioner, submitted that the state government circular that enforced a dress code has no reference to the Popular Front of India (PFI).

Countering the submission, the petitioner's lawyer Senior Advocate Salman Khurshid said that the respondent's arguments stated the examples of France Turkey, further adding that anything that expresses religious belief is not allowed to be displayed in public including a cross.

Several petitioners approached the top court challenging the Karnataka High Court's order upholding government's order to strictly enforce schools and colleges uniform rules. One of the appeals in the apex court alleged 'step-motherly behaviour of the government authorities preventing students from practicisng their faith and resulted in an unwanted law and order situation'.

The appeal stated that the HC "had 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".

A bench of Karnataka High Court comprising Chief Justice- Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit, and Justice JM Khazi- had earlier held that the prescription of the uniform is a reasonable restriction that students couldn't object to and dismissed various petitions challenging a hijab ban in education institutions saying that they are without merit.

What is Hijab row?

The Government PU College in Udupi allegedly barred six girls wearing the hijab from entering in January this year. After this, the female students sat in protest outside the college after they were denied entry. Post this incident, boys of several colleges also started wearing saffron scarves.

The protest spread to other parts of the state as well, further leading to massive agitations in the state.

The Karnataka government, thus, said that all students must adhere to the uniform, banning both- hijab and saffron scarves till an expert committee decided on the issue.

In February, the Pre-University education board, in its circular, stated that the students were only allowed to wear uniform approved by the school administration. No other religious attire would be allowed in colleges, the board added.

RECENT STORIES

Mumbai: POCSO Court Sentences 2 Men To 10 Years In Prison For Eve-Teasing & Sexual Harassment Of...

Mumbai: POCSO Court Sentences 2 Men To 10 Years In Prison For Eve-Teasing & Sexual Harassment Of...

Bombay High Court Upholds ₹3 Crore Compensation & Monthly Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act

Bombay High Court Upholds ₹3 Crore Compensation & Monthly Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act

Bombay High Court Questions Panvel Municipal Corporation's Retroactive Property Tax Demand

Bombay High Court Questions Panvel Municipal Corporation's Retroactive Property Tax Demand

Residents Cannot Be Penalised For Authorities' Delay In Executing Public Amenities Works: Bombay...

Residents Cannot Be Penalised For Authorities' Delay In Executing Public Amenities Works: Bombay...

Bombay HC Asks Govt To Make State Mental Health Authority Fully Functional, Set Up 6 More Halfway...

Bombay HC Asks Govt To Make State Mental Health Authority Fully Functional, Set Up 6 More Halfway...