Karnataka High Court Issues Notice On PIL Against KEA Asking Students To Remove 'Sacred Thread' Before Entering Exam Hall

The Karnataka High Court today (26 April) issued notice to the State Government on a public interest litigation seeking a declaration that the action of Karnataka Examination Authority's officials in not permitting students wearing "scared thread" to appear in the Common Entrance Examination (CET) 2025 is unconstitutional.

The case concerns incidents where students were allegedly asked to remove the sacred thread before entering the CET exam halls. The exam was held from 17.04.2025 to 19.04.2025 for admission into various undergraduate courses. 

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind in its order noted, 

“If it turns out to be correct, the allegations in this PIL are prone to assume serious dimensions about the violation of cultural cum religious rights of the examinee students.”

The PIL filed by one Akhila Karnataka Brahmana Maha Sabha seeks to direct the State not to discriminate against students who wear sacred threads and not to interfere with professing their essential religious practice. 

The PIL also prays to direct the formulation of specific guidelines and instructions regarding the conduct of examinations in the State, specifically regarding frisking by the officials at the examination centres established by the Karnataka Examination Authority (KEA).

As an interim relief, the petition seeks to direct the State authorities to reconduct the common examination test held for the students who were not permitted to appear in the said exam for wearing the sacred thread.

During the hearing today, Senior Advocate Sriranga S appearing for the petitioner submitted the students were ill-treated at various exam centres in the state and that they were forcibly asked to remove the scared thread.

He submitted that the sacred thread worn by the students was done after a ceremony is a part of Essential Religious cum Cultural Practise. It is the case that sacred threads were cut or forced to be removed before permitting the students to enter the examination hall.

Further, the counsel submitted that the incidents happened at all the centres in particular in Bidar district, Shivamogoa and Dharwad district. It was submitted on behalf of petitioner that action on part of officials of respondent no 3- KEA, who acted in the aforesaid way tantamounts to violation of Article 21, 21-A, 25, 29 (2) of the Constitution of India.

The Counsel said “It is an admitted fact that it has happened and there are news reports also about it happening. There are complainants coming from across the state, some students were told to remove and they were cut and thrown. Officials manning the examination centers have insisted that it should not be worn.”

Additional Government Pleader Niloufer Akbar informed the court that students have been offered seats in the government without appearing for exams. The state counsel said that "It is painful for the government also, it was not done intentionally."

The High Court queried with the petitioner's counsel as to why any officer would indulge in such practise. To which the senior advocate submitted that incidents happened at the centres and it has resulted in filing of FIR.

The Court said “What weighs with the courts that averments are made in the petition, that those students who refused to do so were not permitted to enter the examination room and they have been deprived of appearing in examination. However, the petitioner needs to further substantiate further allegations.” Further “The allegations need to be substantiated also and it issued notice to the respondent.”

The Court also orally remarked that “Details of students are not given and neither students are before the court. It needs further substantiation. At least give names of the students. Since allegations are more serious we have to be more careful.” The counsel for the petitioner then agreed to provide the necessary information.

With these observations, the Court issued notice returnable on June 9.

Appearance: Sriranga S, Senior advocate for Sumana Naganand and Ashwini N Ravindra for Petitioners.

AGA Niloufer Akbar for Respondents

Case Title: AKHILA KARNATAKA BRAHMANA MAHA SABHA AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 12499/2025