Skip to main content
Sabrang
Sabrang
Rule of Law Minorities

Hijab case verdict based on erroneous interpretation of Holy Quran: SKJU

Islamic Organisation appeals against Karnataka HC judgment, pleading that not doing ‘farz’ is ‘Haram’ in Islamic Jurisprudence

Sabrangindia 30 Mar 2022

SKJU
Image Courtesy:livelaw.in

An Islamic organisation named Samastha Kerala Jem-iyyathul Ulama (SKJU) has challenged in Supreme Court, the Karnataka High Court’s Judgment which upheld the state government’s Order that put a ban on wearing of Hijab by Muslim girls in classrooms.

The High Court held that wearing of Hijab was not an essential religious practice in Islam. On March 24, a request was made by Senior Adv. Devadatt Kamat in the Court of CJI to take up the Petition challenging the Karnataka High Court’s judgment, for urgent hearing. But this was declined.   

Content of the Petition

A Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed through Advocate Zulfikar Ali in the Supreme Court by clerics of the SKJU claims that the High Court relied upon an erroneous interpretation of the Holy Quran, the Hadis and that of the Islamic law.

The Petition mentions the Surah 24 Ayat 31, and Surah 33 Ayat 59, which say that in the Holy Quran it is obligatory for the women to cover their head and neck. The Petition also states that it is the express dictum of Quranic verses and is also included in the teachings of Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) that a woman should cover her head and neck in the presence of males from outside her immediate family. Muslim women use different types of veils across the world to cover their head and neck This garment is distinct from other garments to cover their body. Hijab is one of those veils evolved in modern period which also got a widespread acceptance by virtue of its comfort and modesty.

The Petition further states that the legal theory stated in the Karnataka High Court Judgment, which was binding only to the Karnataka State, will have a large impact throughout the Country. The Petition claims that this Special Leave Petition was filed in the Supreme Court in the larger interest of the Muslim community.

The Petition states that the High Court erred in declaring Hijab to be non-mandatory practice, on a very erroneous reasoning that no penalty is prescribed for not following it. The Petition further states, "As per the law settled by the Supreme Court in catena of Judgments, for a religious practice to pass the 'essentiality test’ it is not necessary that there must be a penalty or penance attached with it… The High Court is not justified in insisting for a punishment attached with it to get protection of Article 25 for this dress code,” as reported by LiveLaw.

The Petition further contends that according to commandments of Qur’anic verses and Hadis mentioned above, it is the ‘farz’ (duty) of women to cover their head and neck and they are forbidden from exposing their female body otherwise. The violation of farz is haram (forbidden) as per Islamic jurisprudence. Therefore, not allowing a Muslim woman or girl to wear the headscarf is in violation of her right to follow the essential religious practice of her religion as protected under Article 25 of the Constitution. The Petition also contends that the High Court completely relied upon the commentaries given by Abdulla Yusuf Ali in the footnotes of suras to declare hijab as a non-essential practice. These footnotes of Yusuf Ali are his personal opinions which cannot be considered as a source of Islamic law.

The Petition further claims that same coloured headscarf to that of the uniform would not offend the public order of any educational institutions. Enforcing the strict uniform dress code for the students not only fails the test of reasonable restrictions laid by the Supreme Court but also outrages the idea of unity in diversity. Compelling such an absolute uniformity for citizens is seen as the replica of the Nazi ideology.

On March 24, a request was made in the Court of CJI Ramana for urgent listing of the Petitions challenging the said Karnataka Judgment in hijab case. It was urged by Senior Advocate Devadutt Kamat on behalf of Muslim students to take up the matter as their exams were about to start from March 28. CJI Ramana while refusing the request, reportedly said, “Exams have nothing to do with the issue, don’t sensitise the issue.”

The Supreme Court had earlier on March 16, said that the matter will be listed after Holi Vacations, when the Petitioners sought urgent hearing on the grounds of upcoming exams.

Related:

Walkouts, objections, after Karnataka HC verdict on Hijab, but BJP netas hail it
BREAKING: Wearing of Hijab not essential religious practice: Karnataka HC
Karnataka: Two Private Pre-University colleges allow students to wear Hijab

Hijab case verdict based on erroneous interpretation of Holy Quran: SKJU

Islamic Organisation appeals against Karnataka HC judgment, pleading that not doing ‘farz’ is ‘Haram’ in Islamic Jurisprudence

SKJU
Image Courtesy:livelaw.in

An Islamic organisation named Samastha Kerala Jem-iyyathul Ulama (SKJU) has challenged in Supreme Court, the Karnataka High Court’s Judgment which upheld the state government’s Order that put a ban on wearing of Hijab by Muslim girls in classrooms.

The High Court held that wearing of Hijab was not an essential religious practice in Islam. On March 24, a request was made by Senior Adv. Devadatt Kamat in the Court of CJI to take up the Petition challenging the Karnataka High Court’s judgment, for urgent hearing. But this was declined.   

Content of the Petition

A Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed through Advocate Zulfikar Ali in the Supreme Court by clerics of the SKJU claims that the High Court relied upon an erroneous interpretation of the Holy Quran, the Hadis and that of the Islamic law.

The Petition mentions the Surah 24 Ayat 31, and Surah 33 Ayat 59, which say that in the Holy Quran it is obligatory for the women to cover their head and neck. The Petition also states that it is the express dictum of Quranic verses and is also included in the teachings of Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) that a woman should cover her head and neck in the presence of males from outside her immediate family. Muslim women use different types of veils across the world to cover their head and neck This garment is distinct from other garments to cover their body. Hijab is one of those veils evolved in modern period which also got a widespread acceptance by virtue of its comfort and modesty.

The Petition further states that the legal theory stated in the Karnataka High Court Judgment, which was binding only to the Karnataka State, will have a large impact throughout the Country. The Petition claims that this Special Leave Petition was filed in the Supreme Court in the larger interest of the Muslim community.

The Petition states that the High Court erred in declaring Hijab to be non-mandatory practice, on a very erroneous reasoning that no penalty is prescribed for not following it. The Petition further states, "As per the law settled by the Supreme Court in catena of Judgments, for a religious practice to pass the 'essentiality test’ it is not necessary that there must be a penalty or penance attached with it… The High Court is not justified in insisting for a punishment attached with it to get protection of Article 25 for this dress code,” as reported by LiveLaw.

The Petition further contends that according to commandments of Qur’anic verses and Hadis mentioned above, it is the ‘farz’ (duty) of women to cover their head and neck and they are forbidden from exposing their female body otherwise. The violation of farz is haram (forbidden) as per Islamic jurisprudence. Therefore, not allowing a Muslim woman or girl to wear the headscarf is in violation of her right to follow the essential religious practice of her religion as protected under Article 25 of the Constitution. The Petition also contends that the High Court completely relied upon the commentaries given by Abdulla Yusuf Ali in the footnotes of suras to declare hijab as a non-essential practice. These footnotes of Yusuf Ali are his personal opinions which cannot be considered as a source of Islamic law.

The Petition further claims that same coloured headscarf to that of the uniform would not offend the public order of any educational institutions. Enforcing the strict uniform dress code for the students not only fails the test of reasonable restrictions laid by the Supreme Court but also outrages the idea of unity in diversity. Compelling such an absolute uniformity for citizens is seen as the replica of the Nazi ideology.

On March 24, a request was made in the Court of CJI Ramana for urgent listing of the Petitions challenging the said Karnataka Judgment in hijab case. It was urged by Senior Advocate Devadutt Kamat on behalf of Muslim students to take up the matter as their exams were about to start from March 28. CJI Ramana while refusing the request, reportedly said, “Exams have nothing to do with the issue, don’t sensitise the issue.”

The Supreme Court had earlier on March 16, said that the matter will be listed after Holi Vacations, when the Petitioners sought urgent hearing on the grounds of upcoming exams.

Related:

Walkouts, objections, after Karnataka HC verdict on Hijab, but BJP netas hail it
BREAKING: Wearing of Hijab not essential religious practice: Karnataka HC
Karnataka: Two Private Pre-University colleges allow students to wear Hijab

Related Articles

Sunday

03

Jan

Pan-India

Saturday

05

Dec

05 pm onwards

Rise in Rage!

North Gate, JNU campus

Thursday

26

Nov

10 am onwards

Delhi Chalo

Pan India

Theme

Stop Hate

Hate and Harmony in 2021

A recap of all that transpired across India in terms of hate speech and even outright hate crimes, as well as the persecution of those who dared to speak up against hate. This disturbing harvest of hate should now push us to do more to forge harmony.
Taliban 2021

Taliban in Afghanistan: A look back

Communalism Combat had taken a deep dive into the lives of people of Afghanistan under the Taliban regime. Here we reproduce some of our archives documenting the plight of hapless Afghanis, especially women, who suffered the most under the hardline regime.
2020

Milestones 2020

In the year devastated by the Covid 19 Pandemic, India witnessed apathy against some of its most marginalised people and vilification of dissenters by powerful state and non state actors. As 2020 draws to a close, and hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers continue their protest in the bitter North Indian cold. Read how Indians resisted all attempts to snatch away fundamental and constitutional freedoms.
Migrant Diaries

Migrant Diaries

The 2020 COVID pandemic brought to fore the dismal lives that our migrant workers lead. Read these heartbreaking stories of how they lived before the pandemic, how the lockdown changed their lives and what they’re doing now.

Campaigns

Sunday

03

Jan

Pan-India

Saturday

05

Dec

05 pm onwards

Rise in Rage!

North Gate, JNU campus

Thursday

26

Nov

10 am onwards

Delhi Chalo

Pan India

Videos

Communalism

Hate, Arms, Shrine Takeovers: Is Hindutva extremism at its peak in Karnataka?

WATCH: In this SabrangIndia Exclusive show called 'Column 9', journalist & activist Shivasundar talks about the journey of Hindutva Extremism, from fringe groups to the center, in Karnataka, which is arguably empowered and emboldened by the legislative and judiciary, simultaneously.

Communalism

Hate, Arms, Shrine Takeovers: Is Hindutva extremism at its peak in Karnataka?

WATCH: In this SabrangIndia Exclusive show called 'Column 9', journalist & activist Shivasundar talks about the journey of Hindutva Extremism, from fringe groups to the center, in Karnataka, which is arguably empowered and emboldened by the legislative and judiciary, simultaneously.

IN FACT

Analysis

Stop Hate

Hate and Harmony in 2021

A recap of all that transpired across India in terms of hate speech and even outright hate crimes, as well as the persecution of those who dared to speak up against hate. This disturbing harvest of hate should now push us to do more to forge harmony.
Taliban 2021

Taliban in Afghanistan: A look back

Communalism Combat had taken a deep dive into the lives of people of Afghanistan under the Taliban regime. Here we reproduce some of our archives documenting the plight of hapless Afghanis, especially women, who suffered the most under the hardline regime.
2020

Milestones 2020

In the year devastated by the Covid 19 Pandemic, India witnessed apathy against some of its most marginalised people and vilification of dissenters by powerful state and non state actors. As 2020 draws to a close, and hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers continue their protest in the bitter North Indian cold. Read how Indians resisted all attempts to snatch away fundamental and constitutional freedoms.
Migrant Diaries

Migrant Diaries

The 2020 COVID pandemic brought to fore the dismal lives that our migrant workers lead. Read these heartbreaking stories of how they lived before the pandemic, how the lockdown changed their lives and what they’re doing now.

Archives