Petitioners for Hijab argued that display of religion through attire shows diversity and singling out hijab violates fundamental rights. Ghoongats are permitted, bangles are permitted. Why only hijab? asked the petitioners.
WEB DESK/ AGENCIES
Karnataka High Court heard the petitions challenging the hijab ban in educational institutions with petitioners making submissions on the fourth day of the hearing. Senior advocates Ravi Varma Kumar and Yusuf Muchhala argued that display of religion through attire shows diversity and singling out hijab violates fundamental rights.
“Ghoongats (veils) are permitted, bangles are permitted. Why only hijab?” asked the petitioners’ lawyers as they sought an order allowing Muslim girls to attend classes again wearing hijab.
Meanwhile, students and college authorities locked horns over hijab once again as Pre-University colleges reopened across the state. Prohibitory orders are in effect in nine districts to prevent any untoward incident.
WHY ONLY HIJAB, WHY NOT GHOONGAT, TURBAN?
Petitioners challenging the hijab ban made their submissions, saying that hijab was being singled out and Muslim students are being asked to choose between faith and education.
Senior advocate Ravi Varma Kumar, appearing for petitioners said, “Why is the government picking on hijab alone and making this hostile discrimination? This is only because of her religion that the petitioner is being sent out of the classroom. A bindi wearing girl is not sent out. A bangle wearing girl is not. A Christian wearing a cross is not touched. Why only these girls? This is a violation of Article 15 of the Constitution.”
“Ghoongats are permitted, bangles are permitted. Why only hijab? Why not the turban of a sikh, cross of the Christians?” he added.
Ravi Kumar also said that Muslim girls are least represented in classrooms and the government order on hijab is “draconian”. “If they are shut out on the pretext of religion, it will be very draconian,” said Advocate Kumar.
FAITH OR EDUCATION – HOBSONS’ CHOICE
Senior advocate Yusuf Muchhala, appearing for the petitioners, said that Muslim students are being put to Hobsons’ choice – a free choice in which only one thing is actually offered. They are being asked to choose between faith and education. This violates fundamental rights, Advocate Mucchala said.
He added, “The purpose of the Education Act is to promote harmony and not to create dissent among students.”
The petitioners also raised concerns over the MLAs in the College Development Committee (CDC) having administrative power, in this case, to decide the dress code.
The three-judge bench comprising of Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit, and Justice JM Khazi will continue hearing the hijab case. Until the matter is with court, students are allowed to attend classes without wearing any religious garments. The matter will be heard again tomorrow, February 17.