The fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression gives its citizens the
right to explicit his perspectives. Examine via the better clarification of the
liberty of Speech and Expression under Article 19 as given via the Indian
constitution to recognize what rights it confers upon us.
All of the essential rights are enshrined in Part III of the Constitution of
The proper of freedom of Speech and Expression means that every citizen has the
rights to specific his perspectives, critiques, perception, and convictions
freely by means of mouth, writing, printing or via any other strategies.
The supreme court held the liberty of Speech and Expression consists of the
protection of certain rights concerning freedom of speech and so on.
All Citizens Shall Have The Right
- To freedom of speech and expression;
- To assemble peaceably and without arms;
- To form associations or unions;
- To move freely throughout the territory of India;
- To reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and omitted
- To practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or
Article 19 inside the Indian constitution offers us the liberty of speech and
expression with a few affordable regulations under as follows:
It has to no longer affect the security of the nation, pleasant relations with
overseas States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt
of court, defamation or incitement to an offense.
Nothing in sub - clause of the stated clause shall have an effect on the
operation of any existing regulation in up to now because it imposes, or save
you the country from making any regulation enforcing, within the interests of
the majority, affordable restrictions at the workout of the right conferred
through the stated sub - clause, and, specifically, nothing in the said sub -
clause shall affect the operation of any present regulation in so far as it
pertains to, or save you the state from making any regulation referring to it.
Freedom of faith is a part of the Indian Constitution. however, it's far the
weakest essential right of all the available fundamental rights in Part III
thereof. It's miles weakest for the simple cause that it's miles challenge to
all different essential rights; similarly, to claw lower back clauses which
might be a part of every fundamental right within the Indian constitution.
consequence, if there's conflict among Freedom of faith underneath Article 25
and Equality in Article 14, it's miles the latter so as to prevail. In addition,
in any conflict between Article 21 and Article 25, it is the previous that
prevails. moreover, state has been empowered to alter freedom of faith on the
grounds of public order, health and morality. Consequently, a state is well
within its rights to adjust the liberty of faith at the grounds stated above.
Freedom of religion isn't merely to have faith in religion however consists of
the right to exercise or manifest it. The supreme court has laid down that
what's assured underneath freedom of religion is core of religious belief and
anything which isn't always core has no safety underneath Article 25.
Now let us examine if Hijab is core of Islamic religion and if the Karnataka
government is violating the essential right of Muslim by way of prescribing a
uniform for schools and colleges.
What is Hijab?
Hijab is a sort of headband worn via Muslim girls as a mark of religion and
recognize to their religion. It covers most of the hair, the neck and the upper
chest location by falling beneath the level of the shoulders. It'd also be long
sufficient to cowl down the elbows and drape over the higher again. Hijab is
worn with the aid of Muslim girls as a sign of determination to their religion.
It is not simply a bit of apparel however a sign of modesty as nicely. it's
miles the maximum important and respected factor amongst Muslim girls. Hijab is
a crucial element like many different practises of Islam. Hijab is one of the
identifications of Muslims and this is empowering.
Hijab has been a burning subject matter of debate for a completely long term. In
different countries as nicely, the sporting of a Hijab in public has
additionally sparked debate. France specifically, because of rigorous secularism
that seeks to exclude faith from public lifestyles. It outlawed sizeable
religious symbols in faculties, consisting of the Hijab, in 2004. In other
countries like Belgium and Egypt carrying Hijab and Niqab became also banned.
Constitution about wearing Hijab in India; In a recent incident in Karnataka,
which sparked a debate, woman students had been no longer given permission to go
into the elegance. In a Central authority - run university in Udupi, Karnataka
seven female students have been denied get right of entry to classes because of
The authorities claimed that sporting a Hijab violated the uniform code of the
university. Even the education minister of Karnataka said that sporting the
Hijab changed into a kind of indiscipline because it did now not adhere to the
guidelines set by way of the university. University authorities confused the
If the ladies wanted to preserve their research, they had to take
off their Hijab.
The scholars alternatively were outraged by the declaration
and felt that such motion turned into an infringement on their religious ideals.
They protested towards the move and soon human beings from all walks of
lifestyles confirmed their unity with the students, calling it out as
‘discrimination based totally on faith.
Bangalore primarily based journalist Rabia Shireen informed groundreport.in,
“Muslim students are being asked to shift to any other college simply because
they need to wait for classes as they were carrying their Hijab. Our charter has
guaranteed Freedom of religion in Article 25 - 28 as an essential right. Then
why need to the girls shift to every other college just because they need to
exercise their religion?”
How did it begin?
The scenario escalated last week while a collection of Hijab-wearing Muslim
girls camped out of doors a university in the state’s Udupi district after the
authorities’ close gates on them. As quickly as the video in their protests
surfaced on the net, there has been a wave of harmony from throughout the
country with activists asking for a repeal of the ban.
But the university and the government did not heed the needs and it as a
substitute had a ripple impact, with numerous other schools inside the district
imposing a ban on Hijab after opposition from Hindu college students and
activists who donned saffron – a colour associated with Hinduism – scarves and
The state’s high court docket, that's listening to two petitions in opposition
to the ban, has restrained college students from sporting “non secular
garments”, inclusive of Hijab, till it troubles a ruling. The legal
professionals have criticised the restraining order announcing it amounts to
“suspension of essential rights”.
Closing Tuesday, sporadic incidents of violence were reported from exclusive
parts of the state as Hindu students clashed with police. in one episode, a
student in Hijab turned into heckled by means of a collection of Hindu mob
interior her college, sparking large outrage.
What started as a trouble of college get dressed code has changed into a
Hindu-Muslim issue, with Hindu college students beginning to put on saffron
scarves at colleges to oppose Hijab.
In keeping with social media posts on Twitter, Hindu supremacist groups inside
the northern states of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh protested towards Hijab
on Tuesday.The issue around Hijab first began in overdue December when a set of
Muslim girl students were removed from their elegance in a central authority
pre-university college in Udupi district for carrying headscarves that many
Muslims put on.
Campus front of India (CFI), a Muslim pupil organization energetic in southern
India, got here out in their assist, arguing that the college turned into
violating their non secular and academic rights.
Syed Sarfraz, a student activist associated with CFI, told that the authorities
became validating and frightening the response of Hindu nationalist groups to
“Multiple videos have emerged from diverse districts in which leaders of Hindu
nationalist businesses are many of the anti-Hijab protesters carrying saffron
shawls,” Sarfraz added.
Consistent with research by way of “The News Minute” website, the anti-Hijab
protests had been no longer spontaneous “however a calculated Hindutva plot that
has constructed on years of communal polarisation in Karnataka to mobilise
Hindutva (Hindu-ness), the ideology which defines Indian lifestyle in phrases of
Hindu values, has stimulated India’s Hindu supremacists for many years.
Why protests in coastal Karnataka?
Udupi, on the centre of the continuing controversy, is a district in Karnataka’s
coastal region that is considered a stronghold of the BJP.
Samar Halarnkar, a senior journalist primarily based in the state capital,
Bengaluru, says coastal Karnataka is “the crucible of Hindutva” politics and its proving floor
“They [Hindutva groups] started out with attacking women having a drink in a pub
and later started to accost and assault even pals who were of various faiths.
They were nurtured and empowered by using the BJP, which is now in energy, and
locate greater support than ever before,”
Halarnkar, said about fundamentalism, that each Hindu and Muslim, have
determined fertile ground in the coastal districts of Karnataka, wherein
Muslim’s shape 15 percentage of the population.
Over time, Karnataka has visible a rise in activities of Hindutva businesses and
the concentrated on of the state’s religious minorities, especially Muslims and
Last month, the Karnataka state meeting exceeded a regulation that successfully
bans non secular conversions, with the BJP authorities alleging that Christian
missionary groups have been accomplishing “forceful conversions” of Hindus, an
allegation rejected by using Christian non secular leaders.
Congress, the principal opposition party in the state has known as the Hijab ban
inhuman and communal
accusing the authorities of creating controversy if you
want to advantage political mileage before the imminent country elections
subsequent 12 months.
“We had been sporting Hijab for years without any trouble but now, the problem
has been all at once taken up through the BJP and Hindutva businesses to rake up
communal tensions,” Kaneez Fatima, a Congress member of the Karnataka
Legislative assembly, had instructed regarding the Hindu a ways-proper agencies.
Halarnkar said, “Hindu fundamentalist corporations certainly sensed an
opportunity over the Hijab problem and used it to in addition radicalise
However the BJP defended the ban, arguing that the Hijab disturbs the
“uniformity” amongst college students.
“The idea of uniform is to avoid discrimination among college students. there is
neither place for Hijab nor saffron scarves in instructional institutes,” Smriti
Hartis, the party’s spokeswoman, added. She called the demand for Hijab by women
an “pointless controversy” while defending the opposition by Hindu nationalists
as “very everyday”.
Activists and companies who've come out in guide of women protesting for Hijab
have slammed the “each-aspect” narrative that is being driven ahead through
media to “draw false equivalences”.
“Media that assist right-wing forces are trying to strengthen the narrative that
if Hijab is our proper then a saffron scarf is their right. they're hijacking
the Hijab question with the saffron shawl,” activist Ladeeda Farzana said the
“With that, they efficiently make a long time-old regular exercise –
controversial,” she added.
Muslims also fear that controversies like those are part of the bigger time
table of Hindutva companies to impose legal guidelines within the name of the
A petition has also been filed in the perfect court docket looking for the
implementation of a common get dressed Code in instructional establishments
The felony professionals, however, say the UCC has no touching on practices like
“Hijab is an issue of primary fundamental freedom,” said MR Shamshad, a splendid
court lawyer and member of AIMPLB, adding that “uniformity” is a subjective time
period because the outlook of all students in a college has never been
At the same time as the matter is pending ruling on the excessive courtroom as
the listening to is under manner, the women remain each hopeful and apprehensive
approximately the final results and the destiny in their proper to cowl their
“We do now not realize what the court will say. there may be a sense of
insecurity in returning to campus, despite Hijab, because of the positions taken
in opposition to us within and outside our school rooms,” said Aysha Nourin, a
16-year-old pupil at RN Shetty PU college in Kundapura.
We might be focused even by means of fellow students.
Direct And Indirect Violation of Freedom of Religion
An immediate violation of fundamental right could have taken region if the state
had proscribed Muslim pupil to not to wear Hijab in step with se, assuming that
wearing Hijab is essential right below Article 25. An oblique violation takes
place while a general rule, which include policy of neutrality, breaches the
fundamental right of a segment of society inadvertently and because of the
widespread nature of the guideline in question.
The present case is the query of
indirect violation of Fundamental Rights, if any, on the idea of neutrality. The
critical requirement for such policies to be legitimate is that the guideline
treats all and sundry equally to set up a neutrality of cost device. The
European courtroom of Justice has authorised the regulations that not directly
limit the carrying of any spiritual symbols on the floor of rule of neutrality.
As stated, the simplest check is that the sort of rule ought to no longer target
any particular segment of society.
Constitution about wearing Hijab in India
The charter presents everybody with the strength to exercise and propagate one’s
faith. As lengthy as it does now not intervene, or degrade other people
religion, all people are at absolute freedom. The liberty to exercise one’s
faith is a fundamental proper granted by means of India’s charter, with sure
barriers. it is pertinent to mention here that the right to wear Hijab is one of
the many protections granted by way of the charter and the Indian judiciary.
Article 25(1) of the constitution says that there's a “Freedom of sense of right
and wrong and the proper to freely profess, coaching, and propagate faith.
like some other essential proper, this also is not constant. it may be
regulated on foundation of different fundamental rights granted through the
Through the years, the supreme court has dominated that the constitution will
completely shield “essential religious practises.” Before granting any
protections, courts will compare whether or not a practise is crucial or
necessary for faith, after reading spiritual texts and consulting the
professionals and religious heads. Courts will also take into account the
reasonableness of the restrictive measure in query even as determining the
legitimacy of any restriction placed on basic rights below the availability of
Article 14 (Right to Equality).
Even in 2016, while All India Institutes of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) forbade
Hijab - wearing aspirants from appearing inside the front examination, the
Kerala high court ruled that scholars may take the examination whilst wearing
the Hijab because it changed into an essential practise of the aspirants’ non
As long as humans are satisfied and inclined to practice the Hijab nothing can
prevent people from practising it, as that could pass in opposition to the
Provisions Related to Right to Religion
- Article 25: Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and
propagation of religion
- Article 26: Freedom to manage religious affairs
- Article 27: Freedom as to payment of taxes for the promotion of any
- Article 28: Freedom as to attendance at religious instruction or
religious worship in certain educational institutions
Some important intake from latest observations made by the Hon’ble Karnataka
High Court in Hijab Dispute.
The Karnataka government on Tuesday advised the high court that there is no
limit on wearing Hijab in India with affordable restrictions situation to
institutional discipline and disregarded the charge that denial to put on the
headscarf became a violation of Article 15 of the charter, which prohibits
discrimination of each kind.
Countering the petitioner Muslim ladies from Udupi district, who challenged the
restrict on Hijab inside the academic establishments, Karnataka endorse
fashionable Prabhuling Navadgi said the right to wear the headscarf falls below
the class of 19(1)(A) and now not Article 25 as has been argued with the aid of
"The right to wear Hijab falls underneath Article 19(1)(A) and no longer Article
25. If one desires to put on Hijab, then there's no restrict 'difficulty to the
institutional field'. The rights claimed underneath Article 19(1)(A) is
associated with Article 19(2) wherein the government places a reasonable
restriction subjected to institutional restrict," Navadgi instructed the entire
bench of the Karnataka high court.
The total bench of leader Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice J M Khazi and
Justice Krishna M Dixit is hearing a batch of petitions in search of permission
to wear Hijab in the classroom.
Navadgi further said the institutional restriction inside the gift case is only
inside the academic establishments and not anywhere else.
Arguing similarly, he said the impartial claim of 19(1)(A) cannot go with
"The consequence of the demand to claim Hijab as an essential spiritual practice
is big due to the fact there may be a detail of compulsion in any other case you
may be expelled from the community," Navadgi told the courtroom.
Article 19(1)(A) is associated with the freedom of expression of the Indian
Article 19(2) says that nothing in sub clause (a) of clause ( 1 ) shall have an
effect on the operation of any current law, or prevent the nation from making
any regulation, in to this point as such regulation imposes affordable
restrictions at the workout of the right conferred by using the stated sub
clause within the pursuits of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the
security of the country, pleasant members of the family with overseas States,
public order, decency or morality or when it comes to contempt of court,
defamation or incitement to an offence.
Article 25 offers with freedom of moral sense and loose career, exercise and
propagation of religion and says that concern to public order, morality and
health and to the opposite provisions of this part, all individuals are equally
entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, preparation
and propagate faith.
Written By: Bhaswat Prakash,
Ajeenkya DY Patil University, Pune (B.A.LL.