With regards to the hijab row in Karnataka, a fresh plea was filed in the Supreme Court on Thursday, February 10. The issue it raised was that of the right to practice a religion which has been enshrined in the Constitution of India as a fundamental right.
Youth Congress President BV Srinivas and a journalism student have filed the plea. They contended that there is a direct infringement of fundamental rights and even shared that since the row has now spread to other states as well, it might spread even further. In this light, it would be better if the top court takes cognisance of the issue. The plea also mentioned that different high courts for different states might pass conflicting orders, stated a report in PTI.
"Everyone has the right to wear clothes/ headgear of their choice and practice their own religion, its customs and traditions. If a small girl child is seen wearing Hijab, it can be 'not out of her own choice' but for older and adult girls and women wherein it is their choice, the right must be protected. Belief in religion is one thing but religious fanaticism is another facet altogether. The consequences of religious bigotry will not be right, no matter with what religion this bigotry is associated with. At least the schools, colleges and educational institutions should not be made the battleground for the fight against religious fanaticism," said the plea filed through advocates Roopesh Singh Bhadauria and Mareesh Pravir Sahay, as reported by PTI.
The plea also mentioned that the fundamental right of any individual on this particular aspect should not only be considered but also upheld, and that Muslim girls and women must be given the right to chose if they want to wear a hijab or not.
The plea also went on to state that the dispute whether hijab is an integral part of Islam or not will conclude only if the top court takes up the issue as well as the issue on uniform dress code for educational institutions.
Earlier in the day, senior advocate Kapil Sibal mentioned a plea on hijab row before a bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana but the apex court stated that the high court should be allowed to hear and decide it.
