Petitioners have zero evidence to show Hijab is essential religious practice: Karnataka HC told

Quoting Ambedkar, Advocate General argues that "religious instruction" should be kept outside "educational institutions".

Bengaluru: A batch of petitions on the Hijab ban row in Karnataka High Court, being heard by a three-member bench, enters the seventh day today. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justices Krishna S Dixit and JM Khazi, had on February 10, barred the wearing of Hijab, saffron shawls, scarves in school until the final directions from the court.

As students continue to protest the Hijab ban, several schools, and colleges either prohibit the protesting students from entering the institution or have declared holiday to avoid conflicts. One such college, Empress college in Tumakuru district, has filed an FIR on the students. Meanwhile, an English lecturer at a college in the district resigned from her post as she was "ordered to remove Hijab".

Before Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi could start presenting the State's submissions, Chief Justice Dixit asks for the State's stand on the row, "Whether Hijab can be permitted in institutions or not? The Chief Justice further adds that College Development Council is created by circulars and not a "statutory body".

Explaining that Karnataka does not wish to interfere in the respective institution's decisions, AG goes on to defend the argument he made on Friday, that Hijab is not a "religious practice of Islam." Quoting Ambedkar, AG argues that "religious instruction" should be kept outside "educational institutions".

Additionally, citing the Shirur Mutt case, AG says that there is a clear demarcation between "essentially religious" and "essential to religion". Citing the "Commissioner Of Police & Ors vs Acharya J. Avadhuta" case, Navadgi explained the differences between both. He says, "Essential part of a religion means the core beliefs upon which a religion is founded. Essential practice means those practices that are fundamental to follow a religious belief"

AG refers to KM Munshi, quoted by CJ Kehar in Shayra Bano case and says "Religion must be restricted to spheres which legitimately appertain to religion".

Since it is the petitioners who said that Hijab is an essential religious practice, it is on them to prove it. Despite there being eight petitions, petitioners did not provide anything to substantiate their claim, argues the AG. He says, "petitioners have shown zero materials to show Hijab is essential religious practice".

With that, hearing on the Hijab row in Karnataka High Court has been adjourned till 2:30 pm tomorrow.

READ:Bank reportedly turns away hijab-clad girl in Bihar's Begusarai