As a row over the wearing of hijab by Muslim girls billows in the southern Indian state of Karnataka, with ripples being felt across South Asia, India's Supreme Court declared that it was "duty-bound to protect the constitutional rights of every individual, irrespective of the community or religious denomination she/he belonged to".

"We are watching what is happening in the state as well as in the HC hearing. You also should think whether it is proper to bring these things to the national level. We are constitutionally bound and will protect if there is violation of fundamental or constitutional rights, not just of one but every community. We are bound to protect the constitutional rights of every individual. We will intervene at the appropriate time," Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramanna said as the attorney for two aggrieved Muslim girl students requested an urgent hearing of their case by the apex court. 

Faced with the request for early hearing just a day after a similar effort by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who is also a leader of the opposition Congress party, Chief Justice Ramana reiterated that the Supreme Court would take up all these petitions at an appropriate time. 

Apart from the student petitioners - 17-year-old Aishat Shifa and 18-year-old Tharin Begam - Youth Congress president BV Srinivas too filed a petition seeking enforcement of Muslim girls' "religious right" to wear hijab in educational institutions, signalling that Congress was throwing its political weight behind the Muslim students as India sees local elections in five states, including the most populous and political consequential state of Uttar Pradesh and the  border state of Punjab.

Chief Justice Raman's stand, which came against the backdrop of pro- and anti-hijab demonstrations in different parts of Karnataka, was supported by solicitor general Tushar Mehta who appeared for the Karnataka government. "Let the issue be not made religious or political. The HC (High Court of Karnataka) should be allowed to decide the matter after hearing all sides," he said.

"HC's interim order has irrationally directed all students not to disclose their religious identity when in school. This interim order has far reaching implications, not only for the Muslim community but also for other faiths," attorney Devadatta Kamat said.

He gave the example of turban-wearing Sikhs and implied the HC's order was violative of the Constitution's promise of religious freedom under Article 25. "For example, Sikhs wear turbans when they go to schools or colleges. The HC, in the midst of arguments, orders that all students should go to school without disclosing their religious identities. This amounts to complete suspension of Article 25 rights under the (Indian) Constitution," he said.

"Please hear us on what should be the interim arrangement. The girls are not asking for change in the uniform. They want to wear headscarves matching with the uniform," Kamat said as he made repeated pleas for urgent hearing.

CJI Ramana responded, "We do not want to express anything on merit. Don't push these issues to a larger level. That exactly is the state's stand - let us not make it communal or political, and let the HC decide the constitutional question in the issue." 

(SAM)