Read Time: 08 minutes
Arguing that formal recognition of the hijab as a part of the permitted uniform of Muslim girls in state-run educational institutions would have the inadvertent effect of fettering the rights of Muslim girls who do not wish to wear on account of pressure from peers, family and community, Women's Rights Activist Rashmi Samant has approached the Karnataka High Court seeking leave to demonstrate how this will implicate various provisions of the Constitution of India.
Samant, an alumni of Oxford University, belongs to Udupi and is dedicated to the upliftment and empowerment of women. In her IA she inter alia avers to be “alarmed at purported attempt to introduce symbols widely regarded as tending to promote discrimination & exclusion of women in state-run edu. institutions under garb of Freedom of Religion”.
It has been further argued that such allowance to Muslim girls may also encourage unhealthy competition of the sort that precipitated the present controversy as students belonging to other faiths may come under pressure to prominently display symbols of their faith against their will. None of this is in the best interests of the people of Udupi District.
Recalling, that she herself was once a student of PU College Samant has stated that she & peers adhered to a strict uniform code which they welcomed as it “fostered sense of sameness & community” and a “fulcrum upon which entire student body united”.
After certain Muslim girls had moved the Karnataka High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus directing PU Colleges to permit such students to attend college without insisting on removal of their headscarves, Samant submits that she was contacted by a number of students who spoke to her about the knock-on effects of regularizing the hijab.
She adds that these students lamented about these aspects that had been completely ignored in the public discourse on account of fear of speaking out against the dominant voices in the community.
Filed through Advocates Aakash Raman Sinha, Shivani Shetty & Ayusshi Agarwal, the application further relies on positions taken by scholars and activists on the headscarf controversy stating that hijab is not an essential to the religion of Islam and no dress form has been prescribed under it.
Stating that certain comments were made by political and religious leaders insisting on some form of mandatory head covering for girl students, the suggestion that not wearing the headscarf is an invitation to sexual harassment, assault and violence; and that threats being directed at Muslim girls who choose to exercise their right to not wear a headscarf, the Applicant submits that an atmosphere of fear and religious chauvinism may force some students to wear religious symbols to schools and colleges, against their will under societal and cultural pressure.
Recently, the Hindu Sena Vice President had also intervened in ongoing Hijab Row, while stating that freedom of religion is not absolute in secular democracy.
A special bench of Karnataka High Court headed by CJ Ritu Raj Awasthi last week had passed an order directing re-opening schools and colleges while asking the students not to wear any kind of clothing which is religious in nature to the schools and colleges as an interim measure.
The interim order was passed after Justice Krishna Dixit had placed the Hijab controversy before the Chief Justice of the High Court. He had then remarked,
"I have only one short question whether Hijab is an essential religious practice or not. The question maybe one, it maybe very small but it warrants a lot of consideration. In questions like these it is better that a wide view is needed. Dont be under the impression that benches will take a long time to constitute. Our CJ is very quick in this regard. Whatever petitioners have submitted yesterday will not go waste."
Please Login or Register
