Relevant sections on hijab differences
“Is the hijab too democratic?” (From the judgment of Judge Sudhamshu Dhulia)
∙ Is it too much to ask for the hijab in a democracy? How is this against public order, morality or health?
∙ The right to wear the hijab does not end at the school gate. It is an individual’s choice.
∙ The action of the Karnataka High Court which assessed the applicants’ rights solely on the question of whether hijab is an essential religious practice is incorrect.
∙ Courts should intervene in the event of a breach of constitutional boundaries.
∙ Hijab may be why some conservative families allow girls to go to school. In these cases, the hijab is his ticket to education.
∙ How can a girl wearing hijab in the classroom become a problem of law and order ?. On the contrary, it would be a sign of a mature society to try to embrace it.
∙ It is time to learn how to celebrate this diversity and not panic about the diversity of the country.
“Religion is private, it has no place in school” (from the judgment of Judge Hemant Gupta)
∙ Religion is a private matter. He has no place in a government-run secular school.
∙ The government has the right to regulate educational institutions run at the expense of the government.
∙ The uniform fosters a sense of equality and unity among students.
∙ There is a right to education, but that right cannot be said to be used according to one’s will.
∙ If a student is unwilling to compromise on the rule of not wearing religious symbols, there is nothing wrong with the school’s decision to ban that child.
∙ A decision made by a state government cannot be said to be arbitrary because central schools allow religious symbols. It is up to each state to decide.
∙ Students are free to wear religious symbols outside of school. However, in school, students should feel the same.
Both judges referred to previous judgments
New Delhi ∙ In the judgment of Judge Sudhamshu Dhulia, the case (Bejoy Emmanuel case) was mentioned in which 3 Jehovah’s Witness students were expelled from school for claiming that singing the national anthem was against religious belief. He said that the situation of the children in that case is the same as that of the students who are now signatories of the Hijab case.
On August 11, 1986, the Supreme Court ruled that it is not disrespectful not to sing along with the national anthem and just stand up. The court found that the fundamental rights of students, including religious observance, were violated.
Judge Hemant Gupta referred to the Supreme Court case concerning the entry of women from Sabarimala. Issues relating to religion and religious practices were mainly considered in that case. He also stressed that the constitutional right to freedom of expression was not the main issue.
Summary in English: Judges’ statement on the hijab issue
