SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 30

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
RITU RAJ AWASTHI(CJ) AND KRISHNA S DIXIT AND J.M.KHAZI
SMT RESHAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:SHANTHABISH SHIVANNA ,Respondent Advocate:

ORDER

This judgment, we desire to begin with what Sara Slininger from Centralia, Illinois concluded her well researched article “VEILED WOMEN: HIJAB, RELIGION, AND CULTURAL PRACTICE-2013”:

“The hijab’s history…is a complex one, influenced by the intersection of religion and culture over time. While some women no doubt veil themselves because of pressure put on them by society, others do so by choice for many reasons. The veil appears on the surface to be a simple thing. That simplicity is deceiving, as the hijab represents the beliefs and practices of those who wear it or choose not to, and the understandings and misunderstandings of those who observe it being worn.

Its complexity lies behind the veil.”

Three of these cases namely W.P.No.2347/2022, W.P.No.2146/2022 & W.P.No.2880/2022, were referred by one of us (Krishna S Dixit J.) vide order dated 09.02.2022 to consider if a larger Bench could be constituted to hear them.

The Reference Order inter alia observed:

“All these matters essentially relate to proscription of hijab (headscarf) while prescribing the uniform for students who profess Islamic faith…The recent Government Order dated 05.02.2022 which arguably facilitates enforcement

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top