The Karnataka Government Said- Hijab Is Not Banned

The Karnataka government said- ‘Hijab is not banned, but it is not necessary either: Hijab controversy will be heard again in Karnataka HC today.

The hearing in the hijab case will continue in the Karnataka High Court today. A three-judge bench headed by the Chief Justice is hearing the matter.

On behalf of the Karnataka government, the court said that the hijab is not a part of an essential religious tradition and religious instructions should be kept out of educational institutions.

Girl students can enter the school premises wearing a hijab, but they may not be allowed to use it inside the classroom.

The matter has been heard for more than a week. The Chief Justice has said that he would like to conclude the hearing of the matter this week.

What happened in court on Tuesday.

Earlier on Tuesday, the hearing on the Hijab controversy was also held in the Karnataka High Court.

During this, Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi, appearing for the state government, argued in the court. He told the High Court that no discrimination is done on the basis of religion.

The Advocate General rebutted the contentions of the petitioners saying that there was discrimination on the basis of religion and said that it was not correct.

A three-judge bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit, and Justice JM Khaji was hearing various petitions challenging the ban on hijab in educational institutions in the state on Tuesday.

What did the Advocate General say?

In fact, the Advocate General, appearing in the court on behalf of the state government, cited various orders to justify his arguments, including the Sabarimala issue.

To this, the Karnataka High Court said that the central power of any interpretation is human dignity. Human dignity includes freedom, which includes the choice to wear or not to wear it.

At the same time, Nawadgi said that the entire claim of the petitioner is of compulsion, which is against the basic principles of constitutional interpretation.

She further added that there is no restriction on the hijab, but it cannot be made compulsory and it should be left to the choice of the women concerned.

Mention of growing beard in ‘Army’ came in the Hijab controversy.

He also told the court that the right to grow a beard in the military was denied on the grounds that institutional discipline does not require individual choices to be displayed.

The Advocate General also clarified that as far as private unaided minority institutions are concerned, the State is not interfering in the Uniform Code and it is left to the institutions to decide.

Navadgi said that I want to tell the petitioners representing women’s organizations that the dignity of women should be kept in mind.

The Advocate General opposed the petition of the petitioners challenging the dress code in educational institutions.

He asked whether it would be possible to accept the principle of hijab on the issue of morality and personal dignity of the Constitution in the order of law laid down by the Supreme Court in Sabarimala.

If someone says in court that every woman of a particular religion should wear it, won’t it violate the dignity of the person to whom we are all subjugating?

The Advocate General said that it is a dress compulsion, which we want to impose on the person, which according to me is unacceptable at his age.