'Unseen hand' behind hijab row to engineer unrest, disharmony: HC  PTI 15th March, 2022 https://www.rediff.com/news/report/unseen-hand-behind-hijab-row--to-engineer-unrest-disharmony-hc/20220315.htm

"The way the hijab imbroglio unfolded gives scope for the argument that some 'unseen hands' are at work to engineer social unrest and disharmony. Much is not necessary to specify," the three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi said in the order.

"We are dismayed as to how all of a sudden that too in the middle of the academic term the issue of hijab is generated and blown out of proportion by the powers that be,"

The court, however, made it clear that it was not commenting on the ongoing police investigation. "We have perused and returned copies of the police papers that were furnished to us in a sealed cover. We expect a speedy and effective investigation into the matter and culprits being brought to book, brooking no delay," 

The full bench also  dismissed a batch of petitions filed by a few Muslim girl students from Udupi Government Pre-University Girls' College who sought permission that they be allowed to attend classes wearing hijab.

Category: The Legal Aspects

"We are of the considered opinion that wearing of hijab by Muslim women does not form a part of essential religious practice in Islamic faith," Chief Justice Awasthi, who headed the full bench of the high court, said reading while out portion of the order. PTI March 15th, 2022

https://www.rediff.com/news/report/hc-rejects-plea-to-wear-hijab-in-classroom-says-not-central-to-islam/20220315.htm

The uniform can exclude any other apparel like bhagwa or blue shawl that may have the visible religious overtones ; Kar HC upholds Hijab Ban
SCC online CASE BRIEFS https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2022/03/15/the-uniform-can-exclude-any-other-apparel-like-bhagwa-or-blue-shawl-that-may-have-the-visible-religious-overtones/ 

Is wearing Hijab a matter of conscience?

Conscience is by its very nature subjective. Merely stating that wearing hijab is an overt act of conscience and therefore, asking them to remove hijab would offend conscience, would not be sufficient for treating it as a ground for granting relief. Freedom of conscience as already mentioned above, is in distinction to right to religion as was clarified by Dr. B.R.Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly Debates. There is scope for the argument that the freedom of conscience and the right to religion are mutually exclusive. Even by overt act, in furtherance of conscience, the matter does not fall into the domain of right to religion and thus, the distinction is maintained. There is no evidence that the petitioners chose to wear their headscarf as a means of conveying any thought or belief on their part or as a means of symbolic expression..

16 pointer report on why wearing of Hijab is not a part of essential religious practice in Islam: Karnataka High Court unfolds https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2022/03/16/16-pointer-report-on-why-wearing-of-hijab-is-not-a-part-of-essential-religious-practice-in-islam/ 

Debates on Whatsapp:

JD: Some of those who wear the hijab may consider it an essential part of their religion, others may be wearing it because that it is the way they can go out and get an education given community situation, and still others may wear it because they feel the need to identify with their community.

AA: There are also women who consider themselves Muslim, but will not wear hijab because they do not consider it an essential part of Islam, and resent being bullied. 

Each of these cannot be dictated by the State or Law, at least not if the impact of its decision would be to prevent them from getting an education in government schools. It is precisely the vulnerability of such women/girls that needs a "accomodative" stance, when deciding what constitute "uniform", or distraction or indiscipline.. etc..

LJ: And who is to decide what is essential to islam or any other religion? There is a problem with the essentialist argument generally in all matters of faith. It calls for homogeneity, imposition, conformity and the constitution doesnt award protection to any of that. It is required to protect choice, freedoms, autonomy, dignity, which is opposed to the essentialist argument.  A constitutional court cannot play cleric.

AA: I think there is also confusion between the Essence of religion and essential practices.

SS: The term "essential", as is being used in the context of the ongoing controversy in Karnataka, is, in fact, a (clever or innovative?) (device) worked out by the Supreme Court.

The Indian Constitution lists certain "fundamental rights", which includes the right to practise religion.
At times, this right comes in conflict with some other right(s).
In the Constitution, there's no order of priority.
So, in order to suppress some religious right(s) - considered unjust/irrational, in favour of some other right(s), that particular religious right(s) is adjudged "inessential" instead of irrational or unjust. (Such adverse judicial determination may raise doubts as regards the legitimacy of that religion itself. Hence, this "device".)

Hence, the rush to claim that hijab is "essential" (part of Islam) in order to obtain the protective cover of "freedom of religion".

Now, hijab - regardless of its status in the Islamic scriptures, doesn't, apparently, harm anybody else; it's, in fact, a rather minor addition to one's dress.
In the subject case, even the conflict with a specified dress code is also very minimal - it's decidedly less conspicuous than a turban and roughly at par with bindi, bangles and the likes.
Hence, fairness demands that the bar for "essentiality" in this particular case should be set much lower.
Accordingly, there is a very strong case in favour of individual choice as regards "essentiality". If an individual considers it as "essential" - obligatory under Islam, that should be duly respected.

It's a fact of life, all over the globe - just not only in India, a huge of number of Muslim women - rightly or wrongly, wear hijab considering it as a mandatory religious requirement.
Like Sikh turban, it's permitted in many non-Muslim countries as a part of various uniforms.
It's not a case of some stray or wayward and whimsical individuals.
The "essentiality" test must take that also into consideration.

And, finally, a synonym for "religion" is "faith" and not "reason".

Category: The Legal Aspects

When turbans are allowed on school and college campuses, or sacred ash on the forehead, can one ban the hijab? asks T N Ninan.

It is not your columnist's purpose to stray into territory where others will be better informed.

Rather, it is to shift the focus of debate to what should be society's priority: Women's education, and their participation in the workplace.

By T.N. NInan

https://www.rediff.com/news/column/t-n-ninan-muslim-women-and-the-hijab-debate/20220315.htm

Category: The Legal Aspects

If Muslim Girls in all Conscience Believe Hijab is Integral to Their Faith Judges Should Accept it’ Sanjay Hedge - https://youtu.be/3gk3nxwsTpM?t=90  Feb 11, 2022

The lawyer for the muslim girls from the Udupi Pre-University College who have petitioned the Karnataka High Court, says

1. that the right of a muslim women to wear hijab is a fundamental right .

2. If the State or a School authority prohibits hijab under it legal right to have a uniform, then this can be subject to the courts testing the fundamental right with the need for a uniform in a school and whether not wearing the hijab is an intergral part of the uniform, especially when there is no such bar against a "duppata" 

3. that if someone in all conscience believes something is integral to their faith then judges must accept that. Sanjay Hegde made this point when asked if the Karnataka hijab controversy were to go to the Supreme Court and judges were to apply the Shirur Mutt judgement of 1954, which ruled that religion covers all beliefs and practices “integral” to a religion, how would they decide whether the hijab is integral to Islam or not? In some muslim countries like Kosovo, Azerbaijan, Tunisia and to some extent Turkey the hijab is banned in schools, universities and government buildings. In other muslim countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Morocco, Brunei, Maldives and Somalia it’s optional not mandatory. However, in muslim countries like Iran and Afghanistan the hijab is required by law.

Perhaps if the same rules is made for a minority institution,  which has been right o establish schools of their choice, the court may have do a balancing act between the interests of the minority institution and the fundamental right. 

Category: The Legal Aspects