The court adjourned the hearing to Monday on pleas filed by Muslim girls to be allowed to attend classes wearing hijabs. The Supreme Court, meanwhile, declined to grant a prayer to urgently take up a plea seeking transfer of petitions pending before the High Court on the hijab ban to itself.
In the Karnataka High Court, Chief Justice Awasthi indicated at the conclusion of Thursday’s hearing that the court was inclined to pass interim orders on prayers made by advocates on behalf of the petitioners to allow the pre-university students to attend the final months of college by wearing scarves in the school uniform’s colours on their heads.
“We will request and not only request but pass an order to allow the institutions to resume but till the matter is pending before the court, these students and all stakeholders will not insist on wearing religious garments, that is, headdress or saffron shawl or anything. We will restrain everyone on that thing because we want peace and tranquility in the state,” the Chief Justice stated.
“We are ready to decide the issue at the earliest but peace and tranquility must be restored to the state. This is what we find. Till disposal of matter, you people must not insist on wearing all these religious things that are not conducive,” the bench said.
The move to pass an interim order barring the petitioners from attending classes wearing headscarves was objected to by senior advocates for the students, Sanjay Hegde and Devdutt Kamath. “What you are saying, my lords, I respectfully submit would amount to a suspension of Article 25 (right to freedom of religion) as far as the students are concerned,” Kamath told the court.
“We are being forced to choose between food and water. Kindly see, both are essential. Please do not mistake us. We are asked to choose between education and our conscience,” he said.
“You have approached the court, you must have faith in the court. So, wait for some time,” the High Court said while indicating that it would pass interim orders in the matter.
But the advocate for the students objected to the passing of such interim orders. “We are completely in the hands of your lordships. As far as interim orders are considered, kindly note my submissions. If you direct that the students must go without their headscarves, that would be a total affront to their right because your lordships have not determined whether they have a right or not,” Kamath argued.
“It is a matter of a few days only…Please try to understand the situation,” the court said.
The advocate for students asked the court to register his protest while passing the interim order. “Your lordships may kindly record my objection that this kind of an order at this stage cannot be passed,” Kamath said.
While the court was on the verge of asking everyone to refrain from adopting measures like wearing hijabs and shawls, an open court intervenor called for a remedy to the issue.
“Please give a judgment that is a remedy for both groups. This has become a political issue. The issue has divided people. There can be communal problems. It is the question of the lives of the girls. Let there be some compromise. There can be problems. Why can this issue not be resolved by sending it for mediation and compromise?” the intervenor stated.
Subsequently, the full bench adjourned the hearing to February 14.
When the hearing began on Thursday, advocates for the students argued for interim relief on the smaller point of a state government order of February 5, which facilitates restrictions on hijabs for students, not being valid since the state does not have powers to prescribe uniforms for colleges.
The full bench, however, rejected the plea on the grounds that a single-judge bench had already stated that the cases involve larger Constitutional issues before transferring the matter to the full bench on Wednesday.
In the Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal informed that a petition has been filed seeking a transfer of the pleas against the hijab ban from the High Court. “Please wait. Let the High Court hear it. It’s too early to interfere for us…Wait for one or two days,” Chief Justice of India N V Ramana said.
Sibal sought the matter to be placed before the nine-judge bench looking into questions of law arising from the top court’s 2018 Sabarimala verdict. But the CJI pointed out that the matter is being heard by a three-judge bench of the High Court and that it should be given time.
Sibal urged the court to at least list the petition filed by a student of the Government PU College in Udupi’s Kundapura. The CJI responded that “the problem is now if we list the matter, the High Court will never hear it” and asked him to wait for a few days. Sibal argued that “the problem is, schools and colleges are closed. Girls are being stoned. It’s spreading across the country”.
But the CJI reiterated: “We are not saying anything about merits. High Court is hearing. Let them. Give them time”. When Sibal pleaded for the matter to be listed, Justice Ramana said: “Alright, we will see.”
Student protest at MGM College, Udupi. (Express photo by Jithendra M) 
Share
