Read Time: 08 minutes

The special bench of Karnataka High Court headed by Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and consisting of Justices Krishna Dixit and JM Khazi today urged the media to be more responsible with reporting the issue concerning the Hijab row.  The CJ remarked,

“We make a request to media. Our request to media is to be more responsible. Our effort is to bring peace and tranquility to State. Our request is the media may see its responsibility.”

The court was hearing plea(s) by girl students challenging the alleged ban of wearing Hijab in government pre-university colleges in Udupi district. It is to be noted that throughout the course of the hearing, both the counsels and the bench urged the media to report responsibly. 

During the fag end of the hearing, a Senior Counsel asked the court to take up an application filed by him to restrict medial and social media comments on the issue as elections are underway in other States.

The court made it clear that it has already asked the media to report this responsibly and it cannot do anything beyond that, the court however told the counsels that based on their opinion on the issue, they can stop the live streaming of court proceedings on YouTube. The court further informed the counsel that this issue does not pertain to elections in other States and none of the parties or the counsels belong to the States where the elections were underway.

Court further informed the counsel that they could have considered such an application had it come from the Election commission of India.

Just before the court could rise, a counsel submitted that the personal details of the petitioners are being displayed in general and that the minor girl who is before the court has been put under immense pressure in Social Media. The court informed the counsel that no application to this effect is before them and they could not do anything till an application is filed.

Devadatt Kamat, Senior Advocate, today made his submission on how the Government Order dated 5th February, 2022 which asked the College Development Council to take decisions on uniforms is "arbitrary" 

He submitted,
 “This whole delegation to CDC to decide on this is a total abdication of State responsibility. The impugned GO says, this CDC, which I will call the MLA committee (Since the local MLAs are the heads of the committee) will decide whether head scarf will be worn or not.”  He referred to Article 25 and submitted that moves such as asking the students to not wear head scarfs can only be done under the restriction of public order as provided in Article 25 and cannot be carried out by a college committee.

Kamat argued that the State permitting a committee to take a call on such an important facet of fundamental freedom is impermissible and that public order is a State responsibility cannot be delegated. The court at this point questioned Kamat asking him to give one judgment of any court which says a legislator cannot be a part of any committee like this, Kamat replied saying he will get back to the court on the same. 

Kamat argued that State is obligated to create an environment for exercise of fundamental rights and that they are not doing so.

Kamat further submitted that if the State says that they did not issue the GO on the ground of public order, it would mean to say that they had not followed the Article 25 test, he further submitted that if they say it is public order, they would have to satisfy the court on how this is an issue of public order.

Due to paucity of time, the court adjourned the matter to tomorrow (15th February) for  further hearing.

Case title: X Vs State of Karnataka