September 10, 2026 06:26 pm (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
After days of silence, China confirms Xi Jinping’s India visit for BRICS Summit | Big setback for Abhishek Banerjee as CID arrests aide Sumit Roy | Firebrand Tukaram Mundhe’s Food Safety Blitz Hits ISKCON Juhu, 3 Licences Suspended | Vande Mataram row erupts in INDIA bloc: Congress objects, ally NC hits back, BJP pounces | Ahmedabad horror: Woman allegedly killed by father, brother to preserve ‘family honour’ over viral photo with male friend | MEA distances itself from Eiffel Tower-BAPS row, says dispute is ‘between entities concerned’ | Eiffel Tower staff strike after female workers 'sidelined' during Hindu group visit | ‘When will character assassination of women stop?’ Kangana Ranaut amid Udhayanidhi-Trisha row | 11 arms instead of 10! Suvendu Adhikari apologises over Durga image in Bengal govt ad amid Bageshwar Baba row | ‘Meat is core to Shakta Hinduism’: PM Modi adviser hits back at Bageshwar Baba over non-veg ban appeal
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.