![\"'Will](\"https:\/\/c.ndtvimg.com\/2022-03\/jevllej4_karnataka-hijab-exams-ndtv_625x300_28_March_22.jpg\"\/ "\\"'Will")
<\/div>\nHijab row began in January at government college in Udupi, Karnataka, and soon spread to other places.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
New Delhi: <\/b><\/p>\n
Justice Hemant Gupta of the Supreme Court today asked a lawyer arguing for the right to wear the hijab in education institutes: “You can’t take it to illogical ends. Right to dress will include right to undress also?”<\/p>\n
The lawyer, Dev Datt Kamat, replied, “Nobody is undressing in a school.”<\/p>\n
This was part of a longer exchange between the court and the lawyer, during which Justice Gupta also remarked: “Problem here is that one particular community is insisting on a headscarf (hijab) while all other communities are following the dress code. Students of other communities are not saying we want to wear this and that.”<\/p>\n
When lawyer Kamat said many students wear rudraksh <\/em>or cross as a religious symbol, the judge responded: “That is worn inside the shirt. Nobody is going to lift the shirt and see if someone is wearing rudraksh<\/em>.”<\/p>\n The court is hearing arguments on a batch of pleas challenging the Karnataka High Court verdict refusing to lift the ban on hijab \u2014 scarf that covers the hair, neck, and sometimes a woman’s shoulders \u2014 in educational institutions of the state.<\/p>\n The bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia had on Monday spelt out a key issue at the heart of the matter: “You may have a religious right to practise whatever you want to practise. But can you practise and take that right to a school which has uniform as a part of dress you have to wear? That will be the question.”<\/p>\n On whether wearing hijab is an essential practice under Article 25 of the Constitution, the bench had said, “The issue can be modulated little bit in a different way. It may be essential, it may not be essential.”<\/p>\n “What we are saying is whether in a government institution you can insist on carrying your religious practice. Because the Preamble says ours is a secular country,” the bench observed at a previous hearing.<\/p>\n The row began on January 1 at Government PU College in Udupi, where six female students said they were not allowed to enter classrooms wearing the hijab. They started a protest, which soon became a statewide issue. Counter-demonstrations by Hindu students wearing saffron scarves spread to other states too. The college principal\u00a0said students used to wear hijab to the campus but removed it before entering the classroom; the students said he’s lying.<\/p>\n After students were stopped at other places too, several petitions were filed in the Karnataka High Court in which Muslim students citing Articles 14, 19 and 25 of the Constitution.<\/p>\n The state BJP government, meanwhile, justified the ban under its 1983 Education Act. In a February 5 order, it said the government reserves the right to issue directions to schools and colleges “to ensure maintenance of public order”.\u00a0Colleges that fall under the Karnataka Board of Pre-University Education, dress code prescribed by the institution be followed, it said. If that’s not fixed, clothes that “do not threaten equality, unity, and public order” must be worn.<\/p>\n The High Court ruled that the hijab is not an “essential religious practice” that can be protected under the Constitution.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n