August 17, 2026 02:56 am (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
After SC rebuke, BCI chief apologises to NALSAR students over enrolment freeze row | Independence Day: PM Modi’s big youth pitch— AI training, free coaching amid exam row and job concerns | ‘Shakti Ki Saptadhara’: Modi reveals 7 pillars to power India’s next leap in his I-Day speech from Red Fort | West Bengal STF arrests 3 more suspected Pakistani spies in Cooch Behar | Bengal man arrested in Bengaluru over terror links, Afghanistan travel plan | Ajit Doval breaks silence on Operation Sindoor in Discovery’s explosive new docuseries | Rahul Gandhi's 'mock hug' taunt sparks row; Centre stresses 'mutual respect' with Italy | Delhi on high alert: Bomb threat to High Court, airport and multiple locations ahead of I-Day | ‘Who are they to interfere?’: CJI Surya Kant slams Bar Council of India over NALSAR students’ enrolment row | 'Shows how low Congress has sunk': BJP slams Rahul Gandhi over Modi foreign policy jibe
Hijab Row

Supreme Court says no to urgent hearing on hijab

| @indiablooms | Mar 24, 2022, at 08:22 pm

New Delhi/UNI: The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to give an urgent hearing to a plea by a lawyer challenging the Karnataka High Court move to uphold the ban on the hijab in educational institutions of Karnataka.

Chief Justice N V Ramana did not list the matter urgently.

"We will see it," he said.

Senior lawyer Devdutt Kamat told the Supreme Court that examinations were approaching and so this matter needed to be listed urgently.

The Chief Justice said this had nothing to do with the examinations.

"Don't sensationalise the issue," he said, and refused to give an urgent hearing.

Kamat said that the students will lose one year as they were not being allowed to enter the schools.

But the apex court refused to give an urgent hearing.

The High Court of Karnataka had ruled that the practice of hijab was not an essential practice under Islam and the matter did not fall within the ambit of Article 25 of the Constitution.

The court held that the prescription of school uniform was only a reasonable restriction which is constitutionally permissible which the students cannot object to.

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.