Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing(Day 6)- LIVE UPDATES

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

18 Feb 2022 8:54 AM GMT

  • Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing(Day 6)- 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."

    Advocate General will start his arguments for State of Karnataka Today

    FOLLOW THE LIVE UPDATES HERE

    Live Updates

    • 18 Feb 2022 11:09 AM GMT

      Justice Dixit : How to ascertain Conscience?

      AG : When you propagate your belief. Assuming I believe in Buddhism. Once I start to practise the religion, once you assert then you come in the realm of conscience.

    • 18 Feb 2022 11:08 AM GMT

      Justice Dixit: How makers of the constitution have interpreted it?

      AG : I have referred to the debates.

    • 18 Feb 2022 11:08 AM GMT

      AG : Yes that is why they have used the words freedom of conscience and right to practice religion.

      Justice Dixit : One can be highly religious but not have a conscience and others may have a conscience but not be religious.

    • 18 Feb 2022 11:04 AM GMT

      Justice Dixit quotes a shloka and says he does not do any pooja, but that is also protected under freedom of conscience.

      AG: What you manifest outside, is covered under freedom of conscience.

      CJ : Conscience and religion are two different things

    • 18 Feb 2022 11:03 AM GMT

      AG : Mr.Kamat during argument gave the example of wearing Rudraksha. Wearing Rudraksha is the manifestation not the belief.

      Justice Dixit: Do you want to say that freedom of conscience is limited to only atheist?

      AG : Certainly no.

    • 18 Feb 2022 11:02 AM GMT

      AG :Freedom of conscience refers to the mental concept. Freedom of religion refers to the external manifestation through observances and rituals.

    • 18 Feb 2022 10:59 AM GMT

      AG: Freedom of conscience and religion -most sacred part of our Constitution. I took extra interest in understanding what freedom of conscience is.

    • 18 Feb 2022 10:57 AM GMT

      AG : During covid times, all religious places of worship were closed. The reason was health.

      In every situation like, now that they have come with HIjab, courts will have to test whether it is public order, morality or health.

    • 18 Feb 2022 10:55 AM GMT

      AG: If somebody is to assert the exercise the right to freedom of religion. The court will have to see if this exercise affects public order, morality. Whenever challenge comes before court,first test according to me, whether it comes against public order, morality or health

    • 18 Feb 2022 10:54 AM GMT

      AG submits that the series of rights under Article 19 can be regulated only by a "law to be made by the State". But "law to be made by the State" is not present in Article 25, and this right is subject to "public order, morality and health".

    Next Story