No ban but hijab not compulsory in classrooms, Karnataka govt tells HC
NEW DELHI: The Karnataka government on Tuesday said there is no discrimination based on religion as far as the ban on hijab is concerned. It said there was no restriction on wearing hijab, but only within classrooms and during class hours and that wearing it is not compulsory.
The government made the submission in the Karnataka high court that is hearing a batch of petitions challenging the ban on hijab in educational institutes in the state.
As part of his submissions on behalf of the government, advocate general Prabhuling Navadgi said there is no restriction on wearing hijab on campus, it is only in the classroom and during class hours that the bar has been imposed.
“We have a law in the form of
Karnataka Educational Institutions. (Classification and Registration) Rules, Rule 11. This rule imposes upon them a reasonable restriction of wearing a particular headgear.”
“Human dignity involves liberty, which involves choice to wear or not to wear.
“The entire claim of the petitioner is to make compulsion, which goes against the ethos of Constitution. It can’t be made compulsory, should be left to choice of women.”
“As far as private unaided minority institutions are concerned, we are not interfering with the uniform code and have left it to institutions to decide.
“Whatever is optional is not compulsory. What is not compulsory is not obligatory. What is not obligatory is not essential.”
Navadgi cited an earlier ruling in the Mohd Hanif Qureshi case that had considered the issue of whether cattle slaughter restrictions interfered with religious practice.
He said the judgment had shown that the sacrifice of cows is not obligatory. “The very fact of an option seems to run counter to an obligatory duty.”
“The right to wear hijab as an Article 19 right can be restricted under Article 19 (2). In the present case, Rule 11 places a reasonable restriction inside the institutions. It is subject to institutional discipline
“Reasonableness of uniform is not in question. This restriction of uniform is upto 17 years, in PU-II. The Education Act’s preamble says the formation of secular outlook as an objective.”
“If somebody is coming for a declaration that we want all women of a particular faith to wear (a particular attire) , would it not violate the dignity of that person?
A full bench of the high court has been hearing on a day-to-day basis a batch of petitions filed by some Muslim girls challenging the ban on wearing the headscarf on educational institutions.
The court disposed of a writ petition filed by the Karnataka State Minorities Educational Institutions Management Federation recording the AG’s statement that the State is not interfering with minority institutions. It further said it will take up petitions seeking clarifications of the interim order on Wednesday.
NEW DELHI: The “messy” battle between the Maharashtra government and Mumbai’s former police commissioner Param Bir Singh could shake people’s confidence both in the police force as well as their elected representatives, the Supreme Court said on Tuesday even as it restrained the state government from investigating all criminal cases against Singh.
“It is a messy state of affairs and nobody comes out washed in milk after this. Let us say it, this is a very unfortunate state of affairs. It has the propensity of unnecessarily shaking the confidence of people both in the police system and electoral system of choosing representatives,” rued a bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh.
The court further remarked it is time to take a call on whether the investigation in all five criminal cases against Singh should be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), as demanded by the IPS officer. Singh, who has been booked under charges of extortion, corruption and criminal intimidation, has alleged a witch-hunt against him by the Maharashtra government.
“This is a most unfortunate state of affairs. Having said it, the process of law must follow...The matter is such that we have to take a call one way or the other,” stated the court, fixing March 9 for hearing the case finally.
The bench was hearing Singh’s petition for the transfer of investigation in six criminal
KARNATAKA HC IS HEARING A BATCH OF PETITIONS CHALLENGING THE BAN ON HIJAB IN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTES
cases from Mumbai Police to CBI.
At present, CBI is conducting an investigation into Singh’s complaint accusing former Maharashtra home minister Anil Deshmukh of running an alleged extortion racket using the police. The Bombay high court directed a CBI probe against Deshmukh on April 5 last year, and the Supreme Court affirmed this order on April 8, 2021.
Singh, in his petition filed in November 2021, alleged that as a consequence of this complaint, which he also addressed to state chief minister, false criminal cases were foisted upon him at the behest of some criminals against whom he took action during his tenure as the commissioner of Mumbai Police. He was suspended from service by the state government on December 2, 2021. In previous hearings on November 22 and December 6, the bench granted protection from arrest to Singh in the extortion cases while also asking the Mumbai Police from filing the charge sheet against him in these cases. But on Tuesday, the bench took note that the Mumbai Police had submitted a charge sheet in one of the five criminal cases, involving Singh.