National News

Supreme Court To Set Up Bench For Hearing Pleas Against High Court Order On Hijab

sc to hear plea against karnataka hijab order
SC to set up a bench for the hearing against the Karnataka High Court verdict holding that wearing of hijab is not a part of the essential religious practice.

Mumbai: The Supreme Court said on Tuesday it would hear a number of complaints against the Karnataka High Court’s decision in which it refused to overturn the hijab ban in public educational institutions, adding that one of the judges was not well, resulting in a delay.

The bench comprising CJI N V Ramana and Justices Krishna Murari, and Hima Kohli noted submissions by top lawyer Meenakshi Arora, who appeared for one of the petitioners, that appealed against the Supreme Court order were filed in March and have not yet been scheduled to be heard yet.

“I will constitute a bench. One of the judges is not well, if the judges would have been alright, the matter would have come”, said CJI.

It was later mentioned by lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who said that “girls are losing upon studies and have difficulties”. Earlier, the appeals against the Supreme Court’s March 15 decision that rejected requests to be allowed to wear the hijab in class were also mentioned during the April 26 urgent hearing.

 

Also Read l SP Leader Invokes ‘Hijab’ Ban Over Ranveer Singh’s Viral Nude Photoshoot

 

The pleading indicates that the petitioner turned to the Supreme Court to seek relief for the alleged violation of their fundamental rights against the state government order of February 5, 2022. Through the said ordinance, the Karnataka government had banned Muslim girls from wearing the hijab in educational institutions, saying it disrupted equality.

In a challenge to the February 5 government order, the petitioners had argued before the Supreme Court that wearing the Islamic headscarf was an innocent practice of faith and an essential religious practice, not just a manifestation of religious jingoism.

The petitioners had also claimed that the restriction violated freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(A) and Article 21 on personal liberty.

Dear Readers,
As an independent media platform, we do not take advertisements from governments and corporate houses. It is you, our readers, who have supported us on our journey to do honest and unbiased journalism. Please contribute, so that we can continue to do the same in future.

Related posts