NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday observed that Karnataka High Court, which has upheld a ban on hijab in educational institutes, was left without any option but to interpret the Quran on the issue of essential religious practice.
Senior advocate Yusuf Muchhala argued before a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia that the Karnataka HC should not have interpreted religious scriptures. Muchhala, who was appearing for one of the petitioners, argued that the Karnataka High Court has taken the translation of Abdulla Yusuf Ali as divine words.
The SC bench remarked, “You (petitioner) went to the High Court claiming it as an essential religious practice. What option does the HC have?” The bench remarked that the Karnataka HC was not left with any option but to give a decision one way or the other.
The bench also remarked that the petitioner is contradicting himself as they said that the question of essential religious practices must be referred to a larger court.
Yusuf Muchchala also submitted that the fundamental rights of the petitioner are violated and all of the petitioners’ rights are affected on the ground that there should be uniformity. He also cited the turban’s example and said there is no objection to wearing it.
Appearing for another petition, Senior Advocate Salman Khurshid argued that unlike other religions, Islam has no binary of obligatory and non-obligatory and what is in the Quran is obligatory. Khurshid also explained to the SC the differences between burqa, jilbab and hijab and said these are cultural practice and needs to be respected.
Khurshid also mentioned Ghoonghat, which, according to him, is considered essential for women in parts of Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, when they go out.
The court, which was hearing various pleas against Karnataka HC’s judgment upholding the ban on hijab in educational institutes, will continue hearing the plea on Wednesday. (ANI)