Hijab verdict: Karnataka HC refers to Dr Ambedkar's view equating burqa with Purdah system

The Karnataka High Court on March 15, in the heavily-anticipated hijab verdict, referred to Dr BR Ambedkar, not once but thrice, to accurately interpret the laws of the land basis the living document and supreme source of all laws in the country, the Constitution of India.

Pointing out that the father of the Constitution drew parallels of hijab practice to that of purdah, the Karnataka HC order noted that the headgear or systems of the veil "may hinder the process of emancipation of woman in general and Muslim woman in particular."

The Karnataka HC bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justices Krishna Dixit and JM Khazi was hearing the plea of students of Government P.U. College for Girls, Udupi who sought permission to attend classes while wearing a Hijab and a direction to the effect that it is an "essential practice" of Islam. 

Karnataka HC order on hijab ban refers to Dr BR Ambedkar's contribution, philosophy

Stating that Article 25 of the Indian Constitution gives the freedom of conscience to people as well as a right to profess, practise and propagate religion, the Karnataka HC order noted that the introduction of word "conscience was at the instance of Dr BR Ambedkar, who in his wisdom could visualize persons who do not profess any religion or faith, like Chāarvāakas, atheists and agnostics."

"Freedom of conscience as already mentioned above, is in distinction to right to religion as was 81 clarified by Dr BR Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly Debates. There is scope for the argument that the freedom of conscience and the right to religion are mutually exclusive," the order further read

The Court, while noting that hijab is not an essential religious practice, stated, "This doctrine can plausibly be traced to the Chief Architect of our Constitution, Dr. B.R.Ambedkar and to his famous statement in the Constituent Assembly during debates on the Codification of Hindu Law- “the religious conception in this country are so vast that they cover every aspect of life from birth to death…there is nothing extraordinary in saying that we ought to strive hereafter to limit the definition of religion in such a manner that we shall not extend it beyond beliefs and such rituals as may be connected with ceremonials which are essentially religious…”

Furthermore, the Karnataka High Court's order further stated that Dr BR Ambedkar perceived the hijab as the purdah practice which "may hinder the process of emancipation of woman in general and Muslim woman in particular."

"That militates against our constitutional spirit of ‘equal opportunity’ of ‘public participation’ and ‘positive secularism’. Prescription of school dress code to the exclusion of hijab, bhagwa, or any other apparel symbolic of religion can be a step forward in the direction of emancipation and more particularly, to the access to education," the Karnataka HC order upholding hijab ban read.