The issue throws up legal questions on reading the freedom of religion and whether the right to wear a hijab is constitutionally protected.

A Karnataka school’s denial of entry to six girls in hijab throws the spotlight on freedom of religion. How is religious freedom protected under the Constitution, and how have courts ruled on students wearing a hijab?

After six students were banned from entering a college in Karnataka’s Udupi district for wearing a hijab last month, the row over whether educational institutions can impose a strict dress code that could interfere with rights of students has spilled to other colleges in the state. The issue throws up legal questions on reading the freedom of religion and whether the right to wear a hijab is constitutionally protected.

Article 25(1) of the Constitution guarantees the “freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion”. It is a right that guarantees a negative liberty — which means that the state shall ensure that there is no interference or obstacle to exercise this freedom. However, like all fundamental rights, the state can restrict the right for grounds of public order, decency, morality, health and other state interests.

Over the years, the Supreme Court has evolved a practical test of sorts to determine what religious practices can be constitutionally protected and what can be ignored. In 1954, the Supreme Court held in the Shirur Mutt case that the term “religion” will cover all rituals and practices “integral” to a religion. The test to determine what is integral is termed the “essential religious practices” test.

Meanwhile, Karnataka primary and secondary education minister BC Nagesh has alleged “hidden hands” were behind the hijab controversy as attempts are on to make it international news.

The minister alleged, “All these years, this problem was not reported in any college. Students were attending classes by following uniform-related rules. In December, some members of religious organisations started sowing the seeds of poison by brainwashing young minds. Though a majority of students didn’t listen, a few fell prey.”