E-Paper
SC judge cites privacy, dignity, secular education in verdict against hijab ban
By asking girls to take off hijab before they enter school gates is an invasion on their privacy, then an attack on their dignity and ultimately a denial to them of secular education, said Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia on the hijab ban issue.
Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, a judge on the Supreme Court bench that delivered a split verdict on the ban on hijab (headscarves worn by some Muslim girls) in Karnataka's educational institutions, said the question that the apex court should put before itself is whether the life of a girl child is becoming any better by denying her education only because she is wearing the headcover.
"The question this Court would put before itself is also whether we are making the life of a girl child any better by denying her education merely because she wears a hijab," Justice Dhulia said while allowing all appeals and writ petitions and setting aside the Karnataka high court's March 15 decision on the ban. He also quashing the Karnataka government's order passed in this regard on February 5 this year.
"By asking girls to take off hijab before they enter school gates is an invasion on their privacy, then an attack on their dignity & ultimately a denial to them of secular education; violative of Article 19(1)(a), 21& 25(1)," Justice Dhulia further said.
Also read | After split verdict, police beef up precautionary measures in Udupi, close watch on social media
Meanwhile, the matter has been referred to the Chief Justice of India for constituting a larger bench. Justice Hemant Gupta, who headed the bench, dismissed the appeals against the March 15 verdict that had refused to lift the ban. He held that hijab is not part of "essential religious practice" in Islamic faith, while Justice Dhulia said there shall be no restriction on the wearing of hijab anywhere in schools and colleges of Karnataka and that it is ultimately a "matter of choice".
"There is divergence of opinion," Justice Gupta said while pronouncing the verdict on a batch of 26 petitions.
(With agency inputs)
