Hijab Not Essential Practice, Students Made Part Of Conspiracy To Create Social Unrest: SG Tushar Mehta To SC [Day 8]

The Supreme Court today continued hearing the petitions challenging the Karnataka High Court's judgment which upheld the ban on wearing hijab by Muslim students in educational institutions. Today was the eighth day of hearing by bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia.The Petitioners' side concluded its arguments today and the Bench commenced hearing Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the State of Karnataka. It will continue hearing Karnataka Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi tomorrow.Today, the SG alleged that till the year 2021, no girl student was wearing any hijab. However, an agitation was started by the Popular Front of India to create 'social unrest' and that the students were made part of this conspiracy. "Government had to intervene to prevent unrest, rallies…Students didn't act by themselves," he alleged. He submitted that schools have the statutory power to prescribe uniform and that it can curtail display of religious symbols in a secular institution. "There is a statutory power in the Govt to issue direction to schools to ensure compliance with rules. There was a good and reasonable justification for exercise of that power." He also argued that the impugned GO does not prevent students of only one particular community from wearing an apparel. "Other community started coming with saffron shawls. Saffron shawls are also prohibited," he submitted. On the point of essential religious practice, the SG argued that the practice must be shown to be compelling, co-existing with the religion itself. However, in this case, the SG said, the Petitioners failed to show that wearing of hijab is a practice from time immemorial, whether it is so compelling that if it is not worn, they will be thrown out of the religion. COURTROOM EXCHANGE Students made part of PFI's conspiracy to create social unrest: SG He alleged that till the year 2021, no girl student was wearing any hijab. However, the students were made part of a larger conspiracy by the Popular Front of India and the government would have been guilty of dereliction of constitutional duty, had it not acted the way it did, the SG said. "So far uniform was being scrupulously followed. Nobody was insisting for wearing hijab or saffron shawls…In 2022, a movement was started in social media by Popular Front of India, there were continuous social media messages -start wearing hijab. This was not a spontaneous act by few children. They were a part of larger conspiracy and children were acting as advised." "You are saying that nobody was wearing hijab. In one of the writ petitions, there is an averment that she was wearing hijab and suddenly it was stopped," Justice Gupta pointed. SG responded that the averment is unsubstantiated and that the uniform code was in vogue at least since 2013. Hijab was not part of the uniform. Justice Gupta then asked if all this was part of the pleadings. SG responded that the relevant materials were placed on record before the High Court and the impugned judgment reflects the High Court's dismay as to the manner in which the issue was ignited in the middle of academic year, to create "social unrest". "Children are not originally thinking. Nobody was wearing hijab. Suddenly an agitation started…" the SG said. Justice Gupta then asked if any chargesheet has been filed in the case for conspiracy behind Hijab agitations. The Solicitor responded in the affirmative. Impugned GO secular: SG Solicitor General argued that it would be doing disservice to contend that the impugned notification prohibits only hijab. "Other community started coming with saffron shawls. Saffron shawls are also prohibited," he submitted at the outset. He referred to Kundapura college resolution which prescribes that students will wear uniform as prescribed. "They don't say hijab," SG emphasized. No suppression of minority: SG The Solicitor General submitted that Dave's arguments on marginalisation of minority community are "far-fetched". "Government had to do it (restrict hijab) in public order," he said. Justice Dhulia asked the SG what was this 'public order' situation. He responded, "There were agitations. Students were protesting outside the gates, saying we want to wear hijab, there were saffron shawl wearing students...We are referring to both hijab and saffron (in the circular)… It is not that one community will be refrained from wearing one particular apparel...all students must wear the uniform prescribed. The circular is religion neutral." Justice Gupta told the SG that the argument raised is the Education Act is meant for regulating educational institutions and not students and there is no clause in the Act which talks about directions to be followed by students. SG responded that the circular directs the colleges only to bring discipline in the format. "Direction is to the institution that...

Hijab Not Essential Practice, Students Made Part Of Conspiracy To Create Social Unrest: SG Tushar Mehta To SC [Day 8]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags