Hijab Row Highlights: Matter adjourned to tomorrow

In view of the hijab controversy, Bengaluru police commissioner Kamal Pant has extended the prohibitory orders around educational institutions till March 8. The prohibitory orders were earlier issued for two weeks, till February 22. Protests and agitations continue in a few places of the state over the hijab row. Stay tuned for more updates.

Students should follow prescribed uniform: K'taka HC

The Karnataka High Court hearing the hijab case on Wednesday said the uniform prescribed by the schools and colleges should be followed till the disposal of the case.

Read more

Matter adjourned to tomorrow

If a uniform is prescribed it has to be followed: CJ

Why do women need to 'dress modestly' if rule of law is upheld?, argues Poovayya

For a secular activity, one cannot wear religious manifestations: Poovayya

Allowing Islamic headscarf in educational institution will amount to discrimination between Muslims, non-practicing Muslims and non-believers:Poovayya quotes fromLEYLA ŞAHİN v. TURKEY, a Turkish decision which upheld restriction on wearing Hijab in a higher educational situation.

School's duty to ensure a minor girl is not 'shackled' to a practice: Poovayya

Till December the students did not insist on wearing hijab, says Poovayya.

School's duty to ensurea minor girl is not 'shackled' to a practice. The decision whether to wear a Hijab is on them when they attain majority, he says.

Education in this country, especially with Central aid, is purely a secular activity: Poovayya

No religion instruction shall be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained out of State funds,Poovayya argues.

"If the State which maintains a College cannot impart any religious instruction there, can it be also read to mean there can be no religious manifestation in that institution?"

"In other words, can a person getting public education insist he or she has to wear wear religious attire, even assuming they have established that it is an essential religious practice?'

"Even if it is an essential religious practice, it has to yield in a public institution", he says.

Right to wear religious attire is amenable to Article 25, not Article 19. It is not an Article 19 right, says Poovayya

The circular of govt of 2014 has not been challenged: Poovayya

"It did not outsource education functions to any politician. This college isfunded by the Govt", saysPoovayya.

"The CDC was constituted to provide welfare of the institution in tune with the local requirements. The Committees are not necessarily headed by MLAs of party in power", he added.

Srivatsa concludes his submissions by saying European Courts have upheld State decisions on restricting the hijab

In India we have Article 25 (1) starts with a restructive clause. In America and Australia, the freedom is virtually unrestricted. There is an injunction against the State to not make laws on religious issues: Srivatsa

You may follow a particular religion, but practices, customs of other religions can get integrated to your own: Defendant

"For instance,among Christians, mangalsutra is not there but in Kerala among Christians it is there. They have assimilated it", saysNaganand.

Naganand refers to a judgment on allowing Sikh person to wear kirpan. In Article 25(2), explanation is given allowing kirpan, he adds.

Naganand refers to Allahabad HC judgment which held that use of loudspeaker was not an integral part of azaan in mosques.

Students wearing headscarves arrive to attend the classes at Desheeya Vidhyashala Samithi PU College in Shivamogga, Friday, Feb. 18, 2022. The Karnataka Government announced for the re-opening of the PU colleges for students following the High Court's interim order restraining students from wearing religious symbols inside the classroom.

Naganand refers to a decision where the Court said No to an argument by Hindus that bursting of crackers was necessary for a festival.

Naganand: If in the wisdom of this committee, they take a decision that there should be uniformity. It is good for students because it will rid the students of the overarching influence of religion. Because they have come for education, and what is the need for external symbols

Naganand: No fundamental right is absolute. Article 25 starts with "subject to". My right for peaceful existence cannot be threatened by somebody saying I want to exercise my religious rights. SC has said in many decisions.

Naganand: Authority of the school cannot be belittled., The school has to maintain discipline in classroom. If decision is taken bonafide, and it is not questioned for around 18 years... this uniform rule has been there since 2004.

Naganand: In orthodox Brahmin sections, after upanayanam, a boy is not supposed to wear shirts, only angavasathram. If tomorrow a category of boys say that want to come like this, what will happen? School has to maintain the discipline.

Naganand: In the present case school has done that it has said that it is in the interest of everybody that child will not wear hijab or head scarves.

Naganand: These are parental rights in the welfare of the child, it is not that parent is punishing the child to get satisfaction from it. The authority exercised by teachers over students are also parental rights.

Naganand: If I have a child at home, 10 years old, he is misbehaving. I tell him don't do this. Child does not listen and throws things at the parents. If the parent is patient he will cajole the child. If he continues, then the parent will berate the child, and might say will slap

Naganand: In an education institution, the body which has taken a decision by a democratic body, for public order, maintaining good relation uniform dress should be worn, it is public order.

Naganand: Constitution makers wanted a person to have his own freedom of thought process. So freedom of conscience.

Naganand: Freedom of conscience is, Conscience, is that voice which we hear from the recesses of our heart... Freedom of conscience means. What your heart tells you.

Students wearing burqa and hijab leave the examination centre, after appearing for the class Xth examination of Bihar School Examination Board, in Patna, Tuesday.

Naganand : Violation of Article 25 is debated. Govt has not prescribed, it has said insitution take decision. In our case institution has taken decision (for uniforms) since 2004.

Naganand submits that the petition is not supported by a proper affidavit. Mother has verified the affidavit though petitioner is a major.

"I am not raising this as a technical ground. How does mother know what happened in class and to other students in the class"

Uniform is compulsory since 2004, argues Karnataka govt in HC

Naganand: Not rewarding them internal marks? To which student it was done? Only bald allegations. They have also introduced a false allegation that since September 2021, petitioners faced discrimination, in their classes. I have denied it.

Naganand: They say teachers were scolding etc. These are serious allegation, the petitioners have not subnstantiated it. They say the threat was to mark them absent. Yes if they dont attend class they will be marked absent. What threat?

Naganand: One more allegation is that we were scolding the students. We are teachers for many years and they treat students like their kith and kin. I deny the allegations.

Naganand: Some teachers were also threatened by their organisation. They were scared to lodge a complaint. A complaint was lodged yesterday by one of the teachers

Naganand: After refusing, students behaved rashly. CFI has been coordinating the protests.

Naganand: On December 30, 2021, persons from Campus Front of India, this is a radical organisation, approached the authorities and insisted on allowing wearing of hijab

Karnataka High Court begins hearing on various petitions challenging the ban on hijab in educational institutes in the state.

2 more held in Bajrang Dal activist murder case; curfew extended till Feb 25 in Shivamogga

Two more persons were arrested in the Bajrang Dal activist murder case in Shivamogga, where district authorities have extended the prohibitory orders till Friday.

Home Minister Araga Jnanendra said on Wednesday that he has ordered an inquiry against the policemen posted in two police stations in this district headquarters town, in the backdrop of the incident.

Read more

Prohibitory orders extended in Udupi till March 5

Deputy Commissioner M Kurma Rao has extended prohibitory orders imposed within a radius of 200 metres of educational institutions in Udupi district under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), till 6 pm on March 5.

Read more

Petitioner in hijab case alleges her brother was attacked by mob; three detained

One of the petitioners in the Hijab case in the Karnataka High Court, Hazra Shifa, has alleged that a mob attacked her brother and "our property was ruined", following which three people have been detained. Reports said the window glasses of the family-run restaurant in nearby Malpe was broken in the incident on Monday night. A case has been registered at Malpe police station, and the police are conducting an investigation.

Hijab is about modesty, says Congress leader Salman Khurshid

Kannada film actor Chetan Kumar arrested for tweeting against HC Judge

Kannada film actor Chetan Kumar Ahimsa has been arrested allegedly for his objectionable tweet against the a High Court judge who is hearing theHijabcase.

"Kannada film actor and activist Chetan Ahimsa has been arrested by Bengaluru City Police. An on-its-own FIR was registered on Tuesday and under 505(2) and 504 of the IPC. Based on the tweet, the FIR was registered in Sheshadripuram Police Station," M N Anucheth, the Deputy Commissioner of Police of Central Division said in a statement. Chetan had allegedly tweeted against a High Court judge hearing theHijabcase.

More girls remove hijab for classes; stirs go on in parts of Karnataka

Though the number of girls removing hijab and attending classes in colleges went up on Tuesday, some girls and parents continued protests against the ban on headscarves.

Read More

Claiming right under Article 25 and 19 (1) (a) runs contrary: Karnataka govt tells HC

The state government on Tuesday argued that the petitioner students, challenging the uniform/dress code as well as the government order on the question of wearing of the hijab, cannot simultaneously rely on both Article 25 and Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution.

Read More