Hijab Not An Essential Religious Practice of Islam: Karnataka Govt Tells HC; Next Hearing on Feb 21

Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi told the Karnataka HC that issues related to wearing hijab turned religious and the intervention of the state was, therefore, called for. He said that protests and unrest went on, therefore the impugned order of Febuary 5 is passed.

Written by: India.com News Desk Edited by: Sanstuti Nath

Updated: February 18, 2022, 7:50 PM IST

Share

Share Article

• Facebook
• WhatsApp
• X
• Email
• Telegram
• Linkedin

https://www.india.com/news/india/was-order-banning-hijab-premature-karnataka-hc-asks-state-govt-hearing-adjourned-till-feb-21-5246638/ Copy

Muslim women hold placards while wearing burqa and hijab in a protest, in support of female Muslim students, in Kolkata, Saturday, Feb. 12, 2022. Female Muslim students were allegedly barred from attending classes while wearing hijab in various educational institutes in Karnataka. (PTI Photo)

Bengaluru: As the hearing of the Karnataka hijab row continued for the sixth day, the High Court on Friday asked the state government if the order banning hijabs in educational institutes was premature. While hearing petitions challenging the ban, the court said “On one hand you (State) say that high-level committee is examining the issue. On the other hand, you issue this order” and asked will the two statements “not amount to contradictory stand by state.”

Replying to the court, Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi, appearing for the state government denied the move was premature and said, “Certainly not”. The Karnataka government contended that the hijab is not an essential religious practice of Islam and preventing its use did not violate Article 25 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees religious freedom.

“We have taken a stand that wearing hijab is not an essential religious part of Islam,” Advocate General of Karnataka Prabhuling Navadgi told the full bench of the High Court comprising Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice J M Khazi, and Justice Krishna M Dixit.

Advocate General Navadgi told the Karnataka HC that issues related to wearing hijab turned religious and the intervention of the state was, therefore, called for. He said that protests and unrest went on, therefore the impugned order of Febuary 5 is passed.

The AG also rejected the charge of some Muslim girls, who challenged the Karnataka government’s order on February 5 that barred students from wearing hijab or saffron scarves saying that it violated Article 25 of the Constitution.

Article 25 gives freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion to the citizens of India.

The government order also does not violate Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, Navadgi argued. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees to all its citizens the right to freedom of speech and expression.

The Advocate General further contended that the February 5 order of the state government was in accordance with the law and there was nothing to object in it.

The High Court also declined a plea to restrain live streaming of proceedings. As soon as the proceedings began, senior advocate Prof Ravi Varma Kumar, representing Muslim girls questioning the ban on wearing hijab in classrooms, claiming that live streaming was causing a lot of unrest in the society as the observations were taken out of context.

According to him, live streaming has become “counterproductive and children were put to hardship”.

However, Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi said: “Let the people understand what is the stand of the respondents also.”

As a few more fresh petitions were filed, Justice Awasthi requested the petitioners that the counsels for the fresh petitions can take only 10 minutes so that respondents can also be heard.

The High Court, in its interim order pending consideration of all petitions related to the hijab row, last week restrained all the students from wearing saffron shawls, scarves, hijab, and any religious flag within the classroom.

Full bench of the High Court comprising Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice J M Khazi, and Justice Krishna M Dixit later adjourned the matter till February 21.

(With PTI Inputs)