Karnataka Hijab Ban: Major issues raised by Supreme Court judges in a split verdict

Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia of the Supreme Court highlighted some significant issues in their individual rulings on the Karnataka hijab prohibition case. The Karnataka High Court’s decision to allow the hijab ban in all state-funded educational institutions was overturned by Justice Dhulia, while Justice Gupta advocated for the dismissal of all appeals. The issue will be brought before the Chief Justice of India so that a suitable bench can be formed in light of the differing viewpoints.

Following the SC’s divided decision, BC Nagesh, the minister of primary and secondary education for Karnataka, declared that the Karnataka HC order will stand. A review of the main issues brought up by the two judges of the highest court:

Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia

• Nothing more or less, “It is a matter of choice.”
• It is well known that young girls already face many challenges, particularly in rural and semi-urban settings. Before she leaves for school, she must assist her mother with daily tasks such as cleaning and washing. There are further challenges. I questioned, “Are we improving her life in any way?”
• Asking the girls to remove their hijabs before they enter the school gates is “first a violation of their privacy, secondly, it is an attack on their dignity, and last it is a denial to them of secular education,” according to the statement.
• “Whether or not wearing the hijab is a fundamental Islamic religious practice is not relevant to how this dispute will be resolved. There can be no legitimate justifications for prohibiting hijab in a classroom if the belief is honest and it causes no harm to anybody else.
• “The petitioners’ only demand is the hijab! In a democracy, is it too much to ask? How does it violate any other Part III of the Constitutional provisions or public morals, health, or decency?”

Justice Hemant Gupta

• “The purpose of the Government Order was to provide uniform equity among the students. It was simply done to ensure uniformity and a secular learning atmosphere in the classrooms.
• “On the only basis of that religion’s teachings, the actions of each faith must be evaluated. The wearing of the hijab/headscarf by adherents of the Islamic faith cannot be justified on the basis of the fundamental religious practises of Sikhs.
• Since secularism applies to all citizens, allowing one religious group to wear religious symbols would be in opposition to secularism.
• “The State has not prohibited the students from registering for classes. If students decide not to come to class because of the required uniform, it is their free choice to do so. So, if a student chooses not to attend school, it would not constitute a denial of their right to an education. Therefore, a student cannot assert a constitutional right to attend a secular school while wearing a headscarf.
• “The uniform helps to level out disparities. Therefore, requiring uniforms for young children at a formative age is not only crucial but also advantageous for the child’s mental growth by fostering a sense of community.