New Delhi, Sep 8 : The Supreme Court on Thursday told an attorney, who represented a petitioner who is challenging the Hijab ban in Karnataka government schools, that comparing the hijab with the turbans worn by Sikhs are unconstitutional and that the practices of Sikhism were well-established in the society of the nation.A bench consisting of justices Hemant Gopta and Sudhanshu Dhulia informed the advocate Nizam Pasha, who represented an individual who had filed a petition, that the comparison with Sikhs is not appropriate and that the five Ks of Sikh were deemed to be obligatory.
Pasha used the analogy of Sikhism to demonstrate that there’s no reason in the law to permit Sikhs to wear a turban and also to prohibit Muslim females from wearing the Hijab.He claimed that, just as growing hair and wearing the turban is part of the five K’s of Sikhism and that obeying the commandments of Allah in the Quran is a component of the faith of Tauheed, which is one of the five pillars of Islam So the dual nature of the decision is a sign of discrimination.
Pasha said he attended an institution, where there were a number of Sikh students who wore turbans of similar colour to the uniform.It has been proven that it does not result in the violation of discipline.
Justice Gupta said five Ks of Sikh are considered to be obligatory and the five-judge bench of this court decided that wearing a kirpan and turban is mandatory for Sikhs.”That is the reason we believe that comparing with Sikh might not be appropriate,” he said.
Pasha reiterated that, just as the five Ks for Sikhs that there five pillars of Islam and that’s exactly what we are in.Justice Gupta pointed out the requirement of admission in medical colleges in Punjab was that students who do not adhere to Sikhism are not able to get in and a girl was refused admission after she did not raise her eyebrows.the case is still pending.
He said that Sikhism practices are well-established and well embedded in the society of the nation.
Pasha claimed that the right to wear hijab is protected by the right of minorities to protect their culture, as stated in Article 29(1) which, is different from Article 25 does not have any restrictions and a bigger bench will need to analyze Article 29 to define its boundaries.He added that the prohibition in Article 29(2) against being excluded from educational institutions that are run by the state on the basis of the religion of one’s choice is obviously violated when an Muslim who holds that Hijab is essential to her religion is denied entry on this reason.
Justice Gupta posed a question to Pasha whether the reverence for other religions that are a part of the culture in Hinduism is evident in different religions.Pasha quoted verses in which the Quran demands acceptance of different religions and states that non-believers are welcome in their own way of life just as believers are welcomed to theirs.
The supreme court has said that it will continue to consider the case on Monday.
On Wednesday, a lawyer of one of the petitioners”asked the court for guidance on how a secular government, which allows others to wear bindis or kada or cross may restrict Muslim students their fundamental right to the dress of Hijab, in addition to the uniforms that are required by law.
The Supreme Court is currently taking up a number of petitions to overturn the Karnataka High Court judgment, which declared the right of educational institutions to prohibit the wearing of hijab in the pre-university colleges in the state.
ss/uk
