Bombay High Court rejects students' challenge to hijab ban imposed by Mumbai college
- In Reports
- 03:42 PM, Jun 26, 2024
- Myind Staff
The Bombay High Court has rejected the petition filed by female students challenging a Mumbai college's prohibition on wearing hijab, niqab, burkha, stole, cap, and similar attire on campus.
A division bench comprising Justices A S Chandurkar and Rajesh Patil of the Bombay High Court declined to intervene in the decision made by a Mumbai city-based college. They dismissed a petition filed by nine female students who challenged the college authorities' ruling.
In July, second and third-year science degree students opposed a directive from the Chembur Trombay Education Society's NG Acharya and DK Marathe College. The directive imposed a dress code prohibiting students from wearing hijab, niqab, burkha, stole, cap, and similar attire within the college premises.
The petitioners contended that the directive infringed upon their fundamental rights to practice their religion, right to privacy, and right to choice.
They argued in their plea that the college's action was "arbitrary, unreasonable, legally flawed, and unjust".
Advocate Altaf Khan, representing the petitioners, distinguished this case from a recent Karnataka High Court judgment on the hijab ban in junior colleges. He pointed out that, unlike the Karnataka case, this dispute involves senior college students who operate under a dress code rather than a uniform policy.
Khan highlighted that the dress code was communicated via WhatsApp without legal authority, contrasting it with the Karnataka situation where a pre-existing uniform policy was enforced. He asserted that the dress code violates the petitioners' rights to autonomy, bodily integrity, and freedom of choice.
Earlier, college authorities asserted that the decision was a disciplinary measure and did not target the Muslim community. Senior counsel Anil Anturkar, representing the college management, stated that the dress code applied uniformly to students of all religions and castes. In contrast, the petitioners argued that the directive constituted a "colourable exercise of power" in their plea.
Image source: ANI
Comments