Scarf row: Hadiya's future hinges on PU Department's decision

[email protected] (K.C. Deepika, The Hindu )

March 8, 2012

Bangalore, March 8: Little did 17-year-old Hadiya Iqbal, a II Pre-University (PU) student know that her future would look hazy because of a scarf. The student of Jain PU College, Moodbidri, who was denied permission to wear the “hijab” (traditional scarf) by the college authorities, is a nervous wreck.

Barely a week away from the all-important II PU board examinations (which begin on March 15), she neither has an admission ticket to write the exam, nor does she have enough attendance to permit her to do so. All she knows now is that her dream of pursuing LL.B hangs in balance due to her desire to adhere to her religious beliefs. Now, after knocking on several doors for getting permission to write the exam, her future hinges on a letter from the Department of PU Education.

Ms. Iqbal claims that the college management, in response to a question by the local police in September last year, had assured the police of giving her the hall ticket for the March exams. On the basis of this assurance, Ms. Iqbal has been studying at home for the past year, since she attended II PU classes only for the first 10 days.

“Last month, as I had to submit my Computer Science record books, I called the college. This was when I was told that I cannot submit the records; nor can I write the exams as I don't have enough attendance,” said the Commerce student. The college authorities now insist that she should get a letter from the PU Department permitting her to write the exam. “The department has not responded yet. Time is running out and I am in a dilemma,” said Ms. Iqbal, over phone from Moodbidri.

'Uniformity needed'

However, the management of the college stood by its stand. Abhijith M., secretary of the DJV Sangha, which manages Jain PU College, said that the “burkha” and the “hijab” were fine inside the campus, but not inside the classroom. “Several girls come to college in “burkhas”, but remove them as soon as they are in class. The reason why we are saying this is because we want to maintain uniformity within the classroom,” he added.

The response from the PU Department was more heartening.

A PU official, on condition of anonymity, said that the department was reviewing Ms. Iqbal's request, and a decision is likely to be taken keeping her interest in mind. “Such requests (for permission to write exams in special cases) have been heeded to in the past as well,” the official added.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

HC refuses to quash probe against Mangaluru WhatsApp admin over offensive posts

News Network

February 1,2026

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash an investigation against a WhatsApp group administrator accused of allowing the circulation of obscene and offensive images depicting Hindutva politicians and idols in 2021.

Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that, prima facie, the ingredients of the offence under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code were made out. “The offence under Section 295A of the IPC is met to every word of its ingredient, albeit prima facie,” the judge said.

The petitioner, Sirajuddin, a resident of Belthangady taluk in Dakshina Kannada district, had challenged the FIR registered against him at the CEN (Cyber, Economics and Narcotics) police station, Mangaluru, for offences under Section 295A of the IPC and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. Section 295A relates to punishment for deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class of citizens.

According to the complaint filed by K Jayaraj Salian, also a resident of Belthangady taluk, he received a WhatsApp group link from an unknown source and was added to the group after accessing it. The group reportedly had six administrators and around 250 participants, where obscene and offensive images depicting Hindu deities and certain political figures were allegedly circulated repeatedly.

Sirajuddin was arrested in connection with the case and later released on bail on February 16, 2021. He argued before the court that he was being selectively targeted, while other administrators—including the creator of the group—were neither arrested nor investigated. He also contended that the Magistrate could not have taken cognisance of the offence under Section 295A without prior sanction under Section 196(1) of the CrPC.

Rejecting the argument, Justice Nagaprasanna held that prior sanction is required only at the stage of taking cognisance, and not at the stage of registration of the crime or during investigation.

The judge noted that the State had produced the entire investigation material before the court. “A perusal of the material reveals depictions of Hindu deities in an extraordinarily obscene, demeaning and profane manner. The content is such that its reproduction in a judicial order would itself be inappropriate,” the court said, adding that the material, on its face, had the tendency to outrage religious feelings and disturb communal harmony.

Observing that the case was still at the investigation stage, the court said it could not interdict the probe at this juncture. However, it expressed concern that the investigating officer appeared to have not proceeded uniformly against all administrators. The court clarified that if the investigation revealed the active involvement of any member in permitting the circulation of such content, they must also be proceeded against.

“At this investigative stage, any further observation by this Court would be unnecessary,” the order concluded.

Comments