The question of essential religious practice does not arise in the hijab ban case since the matter concerns individual rights, Senior Advocate Yusuf Muchhala, appearing for one of the petitioners, told the Supreme Court on Monday, reported Live Law.
A bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia is hearing a batch of petitions challenging a Karnataka High Court order that had, in March, upheld the state government’s ban on wearing hijab in educational institutions.
The High Court had held that wearing of hijab was not an essential religious practice in Islam and so it is not protected under Article 25 (freedom to practice and propagate religion) of the Constitution.
At Monday’s hearing, Muchhala argued that the High Court should not have looked into the essential religious practice aspect in the case and interpreted the Quran, as the question was related to an individual’s fundamental right.
“Constitution clearly provides that Court should not lay down religion for people to follow, court should not interpret religious scriptures,” the senior advocate told the court. “That is what the High Court has done. There are well-settled rules of interpreting Quran, with which the Courts are not equipped with.”
However, Justice Dhulia pointed out that that it was the petitioners who had raised the question of…
