Hijab Controversy: The Supreme Court has made an important observation during the hearing of the Hijab case of Karnataka. The top court said that Sikh turban and kirpan cannot be compared with hijab. The Supreme Court made this important remark on Thursday during the hearing of the Hijab case. The Supreme Court said Sikhs are allowed to wear more turbans and a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has already held that turban and kirpan are an essential part of the religious identity of Sikhs.
The Supreme Court said that in such a situation it is not right to compare turban and kirpan. The Supreme Court made this important observation while hearing various petitions filed against the Karnataka High Court’s decision to uphold the ban on hijab in educational institutions.
The petitioner’s lawyer had compared
In fact, during the hearing in the Supreme Court on Thursday, Nizamuddin Pasha, the lawyer of a student who had filed a petition against the decision of the Karnataka High Court, tried to compare the hijab with the turban and kirpan of the Sikhs. Pasha described the hijab as part of the religious practice of Muslim girls. He also mentioned about Sikh students coming to educational institutions wearing turbans.
He questioned whether Muslim girl students can be banned from coming to school wearing hijab? He said that cultural practices in the country should not be ignored and initiatives need to be taken to follow it. During his argument, Pasha also gave the example of countries like France.
Apex court termed the comparison unfair
Following Pasha’s submission, a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia said that there are five kakars (hair art, kirpan kangha and kachara) for Sikhs. Commenting on Pasha’s arguments, Justice Hemant Gupta observed that wearing a hijab cannot be compared with a Sikh turban and kirpan. Sikhs are permitted by the constitution to wear kirpan. Hence it is not fair to compare the two practices.
Justice Gupta said that this religious identity of Sikhs has been a part of Indian civilization for nearly 500 years. Justice Gupta said that we are Indians and want to live in India. We don’t have to follow France and Austria. He also referred to the five-judge Constitution Bench judgment that made the turban and kripal an essential part of the religious identity of Sikhs.
Referring to the different stand of the High Court
Pasha, the counsel for the petitioner student, said that hijab has been a part of Islamic tradition for 1400 years. He opposed the decision of the Karnataka High Court, saying that hijab protects Muslim women. He also referred to various religious books in support of his Dalits.
Arguing for another petitioner, senior advocate Devdutt Kamat said that I wear janeu, but can it in any way be considered a violation of court discipline? On this, the Supreme Court said that the dress worn in the court cannot be compared with the school dress.
Kamat said that not every religious practice is necessary but the state should not stop it either. He also referred to the different stances of different high courts regarding the hijab. He said the Kerala and Madras High Courts have considered it a compulsory religious practice while the Karnataka High Court has a completely different view. The next hearing in the Supreme Court regarding the hijab case is to be held on September 12.