Following a review of CCTV footage and a meeting with concerned parents, District Education Officer Swati Raol took the action to suspend Ilaben Suratiya Suratiya from her role as the exam centre administrator. Raol has stated, “I have seen the CCTV footage and the parents also gave their application to me in this regard. I have ordered an inquiry into the incident and also started the process to change the exam centre administrator because I found merit in the complaint.”

Parents have stated that their daughters were very distressed after they were pressured by school staff to remove their hijabs prior to the exam. One parent reported that his daughter cried for hours after the incident, according to ABP Live.

The Indian Express reported that one of the parents of a student attending a Gujarati medium school has filed a formal complaint with the Ankleshwar police station. The parent also told the newspaper how the incident impaired his daughter’s ability to take the exam well, “The school lowered the morale of the students even before the exam began. It was not just one child but around 15 girls were treated similarly… They belonged to different schools. They disturbed the students and also harassed them. Some cried at the spot and were not able to write their exams well.”

As per a video clip posted by Hate Detectors on X, a parent of a student has claimed his daughter, and other students affected, could not write the exam properly. His daughter even told him she was being stared at during the exam as if she was a ‘thief.’

In #Gujarat‘s #Bharuch, around 20 Hijab-wearing students were forced to remove their #Hijab for appearing in the exam of class 10th at #Ankleshwar.

“My daughter came home crying,” said a father while talking to the media. pic.twitter.com/BtPCqBl6NX

— Hate Detector (@HateDetectors) March 15, 2024

Deputy Director of Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board, M K Raval has stated that there is no uniform for the board exams and students can wear the clothes they prefer, “Since there is no uniform applicable in Board exams, there are no specific instructions about what the students should wear while appearing for the exam. It is not a standing instruction that the face of the students has to be visible in the cameras. As far as verification is concerned, any female staff of the examination centre can verify the identity of the student with the receipt and be allowed to write the exam in whatever outfit she desires.”

A similar incident took place recently at a private college in Karnataka’s Hassan district, where Muslim women students were instructed to take their hijab off after a group of students recently organised a gathering in opposition to the wearing of hijab on campus. Reports indicate that the protestors wore saffron shawls as they protested against the girl’s decision to wear the headscarf. Following this incident, college authorities had called for a meeting with the Muslim students the girls had agreed to refrain from wearing the hijab in the future. Similarly, in January 2024, a school located in Rajasthan’s Jodhpur saw Muslim girl students wearing the hijab reportedly labelled as ‘chambal ke daaku’ and denied entry in their school by the teachers. As per reports, the BJP-led Rajasthan government has also been mulling a ban on hijab in educational institutes.

Related:

Karnataka: Muslim girl asked to not wear hijab to school, after students protested wearing saffron shawls

Rajasthan: Muslim students barred from school, called ‘Chambal ke Daaku’ for wearing hijab

Class 3 student threatens to kill Muslim classmate in Gujarat

Cop caught kicking and slapping Muslims during Friday prayer

The post Parents and students protest in Gujarat after girls asked to remove hijab before board exam appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Range Gowda, the Principal of Vidya Soudha College, revealed that the incident took place on March 6 after which the college authorities soon convened a meeting with the Muslim students and their parents. As per the report, the girls agreed not to wear the hijab again.

Gowda also stated that students who participated in the protest by wearing saffron shawls have been instructed to stop their demonstrations. As per a report by India Today, the Block Education Officer was unaware of the issue, and the Hassan Superintendent of Police is actively collecting information from the Education department.

In February 2022, the Basavaraj Bommai led BJP government in Karnataka had released a government order banning the hijab in government educational institutes. The move had seen widespread protests by Muslim students, who argued for their right to religion and education. As per report, the ban of hijab in classrooms led to over a 1000 Muslim girls dropping out of school during the incident. The government order had been challenged in the court with a petition. However, in March 2022, the Karnataka High Court ruled that the hijab is not an essential religious practice in Islam and thereby the ban was not impinging on the right to freedom of religion. The order was challenged by filing it further in the Supreme Court which finally delivered a split verdict on the issue and recommended it to be referred to a larger bench.

In December 2023, Congress’ Siddaramaiah had reportedly proposed after their electoral victory that they would be reversing the previous government ban on hijab in educational institutes, however, as of now, no such order has arrived. As per The Hindu, BJP’s R. Ashok said that the Congress government was making way for ‘religious identity politics in the classroom’. Similarly, a report by The Hindu has suggested that the chief minister has been made aware by the leaders at the Centre to not make decisions that may be ‘sensitive issues’ before the 2024 upcoming Lok Sabha elections and also as the case remains pending in the Supreme Court.

In recent news, the new BJP government in Rajasthan has also been dropping hints about bringing forth a ban on the hijab in government institutions. In January 2024, students in a school in Jodhpur were also reportedly called ‘chambal ke daaku’ after teachers turned away Muslim girl students who wore the hijab from entering the school. The students have claimed that they were harassed and have been threatened and that their marks would be deducted.

In a similar vein, BJP Agriculture minister Kirori Lal Meena had stated that the hijab is a ‘symbol of subjugation introduced by the Mughals.’ Meena also reportedly told the media that he will be discussing a ban on hijab with Chief Minister Bhajan Lal Sharma. The call for a hijab ban in schools was also supported by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. Similarly, there were also reports that a committee was formed for drafting regulations to formulate a hijab ban in government schools in the state and has been seeking reports from other state on the topic.

Related:

Right to Education under attack: Are the Courts misguided in treating the hijab ban case as simply a religious issue?

It is a matter of choice, nothing more nothing less: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia in Hijab Ban case

Needs and rights of Muslim girls ignored by administration: PUCL’s interim report on Hijab Ban in Karnataka

BREAKING: Wearing of Hijab not essential religious practice: Karnataka HC

Rajasthan: Muslim teachers suspended for ‘love-jihad’, as students allege they were made to falsely testify

Rajasthan: Muslim students barred from school, called ‘Chambal ke Daaku’ for wearing hijab

The post Karnataka: Muslim girl asked to not wear hijab to school, after students protested wearing saffron shawls appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The hijab ban remains a highly polarising subject with even supreme court judges failing to arrive at a consensus. The bench of Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, that had been hearing a batch of appeals against the Karnataka High Court judgment upholding the hijab ban order of the Karnataka government, has today delivered a split verdict.

While Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia allowed the appeals and set aside the Karnataka HC order, Justice Hemant Gupta dismissed them. In light of this, the matter will now be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate directions.

Brief background of the case

Readers would recall that the Karnataka government had, via a Government Order (GO) dated February 5 that banned clothes “which disturb equality, integrity and public order” in schools and colleges.

Following this, Muslim girls wearing the traditional head scarf were denied entry to many educational institutions across the state. There were widespread protests and counter-protests, and the communal divide grew wider even as right-wing extremists and trolls grew more vicious. The hate spilled out of social media platforms and onto the streets. Newsrooms also became polarised and a series of deeply communal and outright offensive comments were made on TV news debates.

A nuanced approach to the wider issue of access to education for Muslim girls – their bodily agency, privacy and autonomy – especially for girls hailing from conservative families, was rejected, and the entire debate became communally polarised.

Muslim girl students moved court after they were denied entry into educational institutions. On March 15, the Karnataka High Court had upheld the GO. This effectively empowered college development committees of government run colleges and pre-university colleges from banning students from wearing hijabs in the classroom and college premises.

This had led several Muslim girls and their families to challenge the HC order. They argued that the GO discriminated on the basis of bother religion and sex. They further argued that the State had failed to provide reasonable accommodation to a student to exercise her rights under Articles 19 and 21.

Judgment by Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia

According to LiveLaw, in his judgment, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia held, “The main thrust of my judgment is the entire concept of essential religious practice was not essential to the dispute. The High Court took a wrong path. It is ultimately a matter of choice and Article 14 and 19.” Continuing to bat for the freedom of choice, he further held, “It is a matter of choice, nothing more and nothing less.”

Justice Dhulia also emphasised on another important aspect of the case – the impact of the hijab ban on the education of Muslim girls and women, “The foremost question in my mind was the education of the girl child. Are we making her life any better? That was a question in my mind.”

In his order, Justice Dhulia held, “In my opinion, the question of Essential Religious Practices, which we have also referred in this judgement as ERP, was not at all relevant in the determination of the dispute before the Court. I say this because when protection is sought under Article 25(1) of the Constitution of India, as is being done in the present case, it is not required for an individual to establish that what he or she asserts is an ERP. It may simply be any religious practice, a matter of faith or conscience! Yes, what is asserted as a Right should not go against “public order, morality and health,” and of course, it is subject to other provisions of Part III of the Constitution.”

He further held, “The approach of the High Court could have been different. Instead of straightaway taking the ERP route, as a threshold requirement, the Court could have first examined whether the restriction imposed by the school or the G.O on wearing a hijab, were valid restrictions? Or whether these restrictions are hit by the Doctrine of Proportionality.”

He then quashed the GO and ordered the removal of restrictions, stating that the order in Bijoe Emmanuel squarely covers the issue. That case (Bijoe Emmanuel vs. State of Kerala) revolved around the expulsion of three children who belonged to the Jehovah’s Witnesses sect being expelled from school in July 1985 for refusing to sing the national anthem. The children’s counsel had contended that they belonged to a sect where they only worshiped Jehovah – the Creator and none other, and that it was against the tenets of their religious faith – not the words or the thoughts of the national anthem – but the singing of it. They did not mean any disrespect to the national anthem, and dutifully remained standing when it was sung at school in the morning assembly.

The supreme court bench of Justice OC Reddy had held, “The Fundamental Rights of the appellants under Art. 19(1)(a) and  25(1) have been infringed and they are entitled to be protected. The expulsion of the three children from the school for the reason that because of their conscientiously held religious faith, they do not join the singing of the National Anthem in the morning assembly though they do stand respectfully when the National Anthem is sung, is a violation of the fundamental right to freedom of conscience and freely to profess, practice and propagate religion.” Therefore, the judgment of the High Court was set aside and the court had directed that the children be readmitted to the school.

Justice Dhulia’s judgment relied on this case and he set aside the Karnataka HC judgment and ordered the removal of restrictions, saying, “There shall be no restriction on the wearing of hijab anywhere in schools and colleges in Karnataka.”

Judgment by Justice Hemant Gupta

Justice Hemant Gupta dismissed the appeals as he did not find the Karnataka GO to be “against the ethic of secularism”. It is noteworthy that while hearing the case in September, when Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat, who was appearing for the Petitioners, submitted that the right to freedom of expression under Article 19 of the Constitution includes dress, it was Justice Gupta who had posed the question, “You can’t take it to illogical ends. Right to dress will include right to undress also?”

In his order dated October 13, Justice Gupta observed, “The concept of fraternity will stand fragmented as the apparent distinction of some of the students wearing headscarf would not form a homogenous group of students in a school where education is to be imparted homogeneously and equally, irrespective of any religious identification mark. The Constitutional goal of fraternity would be defeated if the students are permitted to carry their apparent religious symbols with them to the classroom.”

He further held, “Religion, which is a private affair, has no meaning in a secular school run by the State. The students are free to profess their religion and carry out their religious activities other than when they are attending a classroom where religious identities should be left behind.”

He finally ruled that “secularism is applicable to all citizens, therefore, permitting one religious community to wear their religious symbols would be antithesis to secularism. Thus, the Government Order cannot be said to be against the ethic of secularism or to the objective of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983.”

The entire judgment may be read here: 

Justice Gupta

Justice Dhulia

Related:

Hijab Ban case: SC wonders if right to dress also makes right to undress a fundamental right

BREAKING: Wearing of Hijab not essential religious practice: Karnataka HC

The post It is a matter of choice, nothing more nothing less: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia in Hijab Ban case appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Karnataka girl-students wearing and fighting for their right to a hijab inside classrooms faced fresh horror as senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and Vice President of Pre-University College Development Committee Yashpal Survarna accused the six students of belonging to terrorist organisations, reported Deccan Herald.

On March 15, the Karnataka High Court ruled that wearing of hijab is not essential to the practice of the Islamic faith. The decision sparked considerable anger amongst Muslim girls who continued to boycott and protest the hijab ban. The six girls from Udupi are continuing their legal battle, promising to challenge the decision in the Supreme Court. Shortly after the verdict, the girls had held a press conference wherein they lamented not getting justice from the High Court.

“We thought HC will uphold constitutional values. We won’t go to college without a hijab. If Ambedkar was alive he would be crying,” said one of the girls in Kannada.

*We didn’t get justice by the high court judgement. We thought HC will upheld constitutional values. We won’t go to college without #hijab. If #Ambedkar was alive he would be crying* says six girl student petitioners from #Udupi #Karnataka #KarnatakaHighCourt #KarnatakaHijabrow pic.twitter.com/hFjoKO0D54

— Imran Khan (@KeypadGuerilla) March 15, 2022

Strangely, their grievances were met with singular accusation from Survarna on March 16 when he claimed that the girls were “anti-nationals” and “members of a terrorist organisations”. He went on to say that the six youths have brought disrepute to the judiciary by their statements and have no right to live in India.

Responding to their press conference statements, the BJP OBC Morcha General Secretary said, “Let these girls go to a country where they can practise their religion. Religion has no place in front of the Constitution and the judiciary. The verdict was issued within the framework of Ambedkar’s constitution.”

Those 6 students belong 2 #terrorist orgn.They have brought disrepute to judiciary by their statements.Vhave demanded inquiry against those 6 students who are members of #terrorist orgn.They have no right to live here:Yashpal Suvarna VP #Udupi girls college CDC & NS BJP morcha. pic.twitter.com/uPiodK37pM

— Imran Khan (@KeypadGuerilla) March 16, 2022

Alleging that these girls cannot be expected to serve the country, he called their actions politically-motivated. Meanwhile, hundreds of other Muslim girls continue protests despite fast-approaching exams. Students from rural Bengaluru and Hassan districts refuse to give up their right to hijab for their right to education.

More than 15 students protested in #Hassan #Karnataka demanding they be allowed inside campuses wearing #Hijab. The protestors said- they want education with hijab and not without it. And they wont go to college without hijab. pic.twitter.com/q9TKkU1EGf

— Imran Khan (@KeypadGuerilla) March 16, 2022

#Hijab wearing students were stopped at the gates by Govt girls college authorities at Vijayapura town, Devanahalli, #Bengaluru rural.They were told that due to HC order.They will not be allowed inside with hijab. Students didn’t relent to write their exams without hijab. pic.twitter.com/PvU8NIZkwb

— Imran Khan (@KeypadGuerilla) March 17, 2022

Related:

Hijab Ban: Identity politics or body policing?
BREAKING: Wearing of Hijab not essential religious practice: Karnataka HC
Walkouts, objections, after Karnataka HC verdict on Hijab, but BJP netas hail it
Karnataka: Two Private Pre-University colleges allow students to wear Hijab
Hijab ban: News media loses interest but student protests continue

The post Hijab row: Udupi girls dubbed terrorists by BJP leader appeared first on SabrangIndia.

While the Karnataka High Court continues to discuss the presence of religious clothing, especially hijab, in educational institutions, the state’s colleges and even schools are erupting with news of authorities demanding that girl students remove their hijab inside classrooms.

The anger on social media has now taken a new course with discussions of whether non-Islamic religions also have a presence in educational institutions. This gathered steam after a video shared by Times of India reporter Shreyas H. S. of Karkala’s Jaycees English Medium School (JEMS) students chanting the Hanuman Chalisa, started trending on Twitter on February 16, 2022.

While #Muslim students in #BJP ruled #Karnataka are targeted for wearing #Hijab,the teachers and kids of Jaycees English Medium School at Karkala chant Mantras. In this #school every day Hanuman Chalisa is read in fully display of #Hinduism pic.twitter.com/2Lb4eqYi7K

— Shreyas HS (@shreyas_ToI) February 15, 2022

The video shows many women devotees sitting at the front of a hall for the bhajan while students at the back sing along. The tweet draws comparison of this with the hijab controversy pointing out that the bhajan is sung in “full display of Hinduism”. 

This argument does not hold well, considering the school in question is a private school. But it drives the conversation towards the larger question of the presence of religion in educational institutions.

JEMS’ secular attitude

While there is no official website of the JEMS, scattered information across the internet says that it is a one-of-a-kind school that first introduced English as a medium in the taluka. Founded in 1980 by the Karkala Junior Chamber under the leadership of K. P. Shenoy, the school started off in leased premises at the Sri Ananthashayana Temple.

Eventually, it managed enough funds to build its independent building near the Swaraj Maidan on a hill that allows a view of a Bahubali statue and Chathurmukha Basathi, a Jain temple. Its back-to-school video showed a pandit maha-acharya visiting the school-opening as an important guest.

However, the school is a private co-ed institution, that as per the YouTube videos shared by its teachers, invests in the secular image by celebrating non-Hindu events like Christmas. Largely, the school promotes the image of pushing its motto “Live the Dreams and Build the Future”.

Secular image of public and private institutions

Owing to its private funding, the school does not make for a good comparison with the PU colleges that have come under the public eye recently. Still, the discussion points towards other government-funded institutions that do prioritise Hindu festivals or rituals.

For example, the dominance of Hindu festivals in terms of number and length when schools list out annual holidays. Non-minority schools in India prioritise Hindu events in their calendar. 

Similarly, on February 25, 2021, the Centre introduced the national-level voluntary online exam on “cow science” to teach students and general public about the benefits of the indigenous cow. Cows are sacred animals in Hinduism. Thus, the existence of such a course caters to the beliefs of a particular community, rather than people at large. Yet, the incident received mild response from the public. Meanwhile, controversy over a hijab – a scarf – has taken the nation by storm.

The root of the hijab controversy

Currently, the hijab row is often diverting attention from even election-related news at times. By February 15, school children were told to take off their hijab causing havoc at a time when final exams are fast approaching.

Still, since the garment relates specifically to Muslim women, many journalists like Rana Ayyub, Faye D’Souza and RJ Sayema argued that the matter of a Muslim woman’s autonomy to wear what they want. The protesting students have also argued the same. The older women were trolled on social media later for exercising this same right to choice and not donning a hijab.

The matter also fits into the Hate Pyramid that tracks the course of hate from societal prejudices to all-out genocide. With the violence in some districts of Karnataka, the hijab row has already reached the fourth stage of the pyramid “Violence” while other areas like Madhya Pradesh, Pondicherry and Uttar Pradesh are entering the third stage of educational exclusion of Islamic women for wearing scarves.

Therefore, the conversation on social media and in the public’s eye is now shifting away from the underlying issues of Islamophobia and women’s autonomy, subjects that actually need greater attention and discussion.

Related:

Hijab ban case: Hijab in line with freedom of expression, submits petitioner
Hijab ban: Multiple Dimensions
Hijab controversy now hits schools!
How can a College Committee make decision on ‘public order’: Petitioners at Hijab Ban hearing
Hijab Case: Will action be taken against Karanataka BJP for sharing details of minor Muslim students?

The post Hijab controversy: Social media turns attention to other religions in schools appeared first on SabrangIndia.