Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing(Day 5)- LIVE UPDATES

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

17 Feb 2022 8:33 AM GMT

  • Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing(Day 5)- LIVE UPDATES

    Karnataka High Court Full Bench will continue hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the hijab ban in educational institutions.The matter is before a bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi will hear the petitions today at 2.30 PM.On Friday the Court requested the State to re-open the educational institutions at the earliest and...

    Karnataka High Court Full Bench will continue hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the hijab ban in educational institutions.

    The matter is before a bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi will hear the petitions today at 2.30 PM.

    On Friday the Court requested the State to re-open the educational institutions at the earliest and has restrained students from wearing any sort of religious clothes in classrooms, regardless of their faith, while the matter is pending hearing.

    Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat appearing on behalf of aggrieved students made extensive arguments on Monday. It is the petitioner's case that the right to wear hijab is an essential religious practice under Islam, and the State is not empowered to interfere with such rights under Articles 14,19 and 25 of the Constitution.

    Kamat had underscored that the declaration made by the State government that wearing of a headscarf is not protected by Article 25 of the Constitution was "totally erroneous'. It was also submitted that the conduct of the State government in delegating to the College Development Committee (CDC) to decide whether to allow headscarves or not is 'totally illegal'.

    On Wednesday Prof Ravivarma Kumar, Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioners today argued that the state is discriminating against Muslim girls, solely on the basis of their religion. He highlighted that the Government Order dated February 5 targets wearing of hijab whereas other religious symbols are not taken into account. This leads to hostile discrimination violating Article 15 of the Constitution.

    Sr Adv Yusuf Muchhala argued that the impugned GO, preventing Muslim girls from wearing headscarves, suffers from manifest arbitrariness. He referred to the principle of manifest arbitrariness used by the Supreme Court to strike down triple talaq in the Shayra Bano case.

    "They are only putting one apron over their head. When we say uniform, we cannot strictly confine to the dress code. What was the practice adopted at school has to be seen. It has been changed without notice. Fairness requires notice. Fairness requires being heard."

    FOLLOW THE LIVE-UPDATES HERE

    Live Updates

    • 17 Feb 2022 9:25 AM GMT

      Chief Justice : Will you listen to court also? First show your bonafides, who are you?

      Kotwal: I am bringing to the notice of the court the international treaties

      CJ : We can't permit to argue like this without listening to court. Who are you?

    • 17 Feb 2022 9:22 AM GMT

      CJ: What is your contention?

      Kotwal: Action of the State is not in consonance with International Treaties and Conventions.

    • 17 Feb 2022 9:21 AM GMT

      Kotwal: Respondents action is creating arbitrary discrimination solely on the basis of religion and gender, they are violating right to education solely on the basis of religious headgear, the Hijab.

      Kotwal refers to CEDAW.

    • 17 Feb 2022 9:21 AM GMT

      Kotwal submits that apart from Articles 14, 15 and 25, the State's action also violates Article 51(c) -foster respect for international law and treaty obligations. Kotwal refers to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    • 17 Feb 2022 9:19 AM GMT

      CJ to counsel: We will give you a day's time to clear the objections. Put up tomorrow.

      Next petition taken.

      Adv Rahamathulla Kotwal now making submissions.

    • 17 Feb 2022 9:18 AM GMT

      Advocate General : This petition is an abuse of process. There is a direction to a respondent who is not made a party. 

    • 17 Feb 2022 9:17 AM GMT

      A new petition taken.

      CJ to counsel : You have not paid court fees. There is a deficit of Rs 300. You have filed petition on Feb 8 and till now you have not paid court fees. How can you say you were not given opportunity? Objections were notified.

    • 17 Feb 2022 9:15 AM GMT

      CJ: Four petitions are heard. Four are left. We don't know how much more time do you'll need.

      Another intervenor mentions.

      CJ: We cannot give so much time..

    • 17 Feb 2022 9:13 AM GMT

      CJ: We fail to understand the concept of intervention applications. We were hearing petitioners & then respondents. If we require we will take your assistance. You should not as a matter of right ask to be heard. We don't need intervention of anybody.

    • 17 Feb 2022 9:12 AM GMT

      Adv Shadad Farast now mentions : We have filed an IA. The only issue we want to flag is that United Nations Convention of Child to which India is a signatory recognizes some rights.

    Next Story