E-Paper
Supreme Court on hijab row: 'We are watching, will interfere only at right time'
CJI NV Ramana said, “I don't want to express anything. Don't take it on a larger level. We also know what's happening in the state and the hearing and you also have to think over whether it's proper to bring it to Delhi.”
The Supreme Court on Friday declined to urgently hear the appeals against the Karnataka high court's interim order (the written order has not yet been issued) banning the hijab and other religious dresses in schools and colleges in the state. Chief Justice of India NV Ramana said the apex court will interfere only at an appropriate time. "Don't spread these things to a national level. We will interfere only at an appropriate time," the CJI said.
Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat mentioned the special leave petition that was moved by a student against the interim order passed by the Karnataka high court on Thursday. "This in effect is complete suspension," advocate Kamat said.
The solicitor general for the state government said the order of the Karnataka high court interim verdict has not come out yet, following which advocate Kamat pushed for a hearing on Monday when the Karnataka high court is also scheduled to further hear the case.
“I don't want to express anything. Don't take it on a larger level. We also know what's happening in the state and the hearing and you also have to think over whether it's proper to bring it to Delhi," CJI said, as quoted by Livelaw.
The Karnataka high court on Thursday passed an interim order restraining students from wearing any religious clothes inside schools and colleges and the educational institutes will be reopening from February 14. The special leave petition said the interim order has put the choice of conscience of individuals into question. Along with an ex-parte ad-interim stay of operation of the impugned order dated 10th of February, 2022 passed by the High Court of Karnataka, the petitioner has also sought an ex-parte ad-interim stay of operation of the proceedings in the case pending before the High Court passed by a Co-ordinate Bench, Livelaw reported.
(With inputs from Bureau)
