Image used for representational purposes only. (Express Illustrations)
Uttar Pradesh

Allahabad High Court refuses to allow hijab in schools, says uniform rules must be followed

The petitioner argued that wearing a hijab was linked to her religious belief. Wearing it granted her fundamental rights such as privacy, personal liberty, and freedom of speech.

Namita Bajpai

LUCKNOW: The Allahabad High Court, on Monday, refused to allow students to wear hijab in schools. The court said that following the school uniform rules was mandatory as it helped promote a sense of equality among children and also gave the school its own identity.

The High Court said uniforms helped maintain an environment free from religious discrimination. Therefore, no student could insist on changing the dress code prescribed by the school.

"Permission to wear a hijab on an individual basis cannot be granted. This would be against the very concept of a uniform. It would shift the authority to determine school discipline from the institution to individual students," observed the court.

A division bench, comprising Justice JJ Munir and Justice Inderjeet Singh, made those remarks while dismissing the petition of a minor student, Sukaina Rizvi, who had sought permission to attend classes wearing a hijab along with the school's prescribed dress code.

Petitioner Sukaina Rizvi is an 11th-grade student at Tagore Public School in Attarsuiya, Prayagraj. She filed a petition in the High Court through her mother.

The student argued that she had been attending school wearing a hijab from classes 6 to 10, and no objections were ever raised. The student also attached her old identity card and a group photo from the school with the petition.

The student stated that she now wanted to attend school in the 11th grade wearing a hijab, but was not being granted permission. "We also complained to the DM, upon which the District Inspector of Schools (DIOS) sought a report.

The school principal clarified that this is an educational institution where there is a uniform dress code for all students. Granting a special exemption to one student would disrupt the school's system," the petitioner told the court.

The petitioner argued that wearing a hijab was linked to her religious belief. Wearing it granted her fundamental rights such as privacy, personal liberty, and freedom of speech. In such a situation, the school should be directed not to stop her from wearing a hijab.

The court said: "Only the school administration has the complete right to decide the dress code." The court stated that as long as the school's dress code for all children was framed with the right intent and did not discriminate against anyone, the school administration had the absolute right to decide what the dress would be.

The bench added that even if the school had previously allowed the scarf (hijab), it did not mean that it had become a permanent right of the students forever. The school administration was free to change its rules. It was not compelled to continue with old exemptions, observed the bench.

The court stated: "Wearing hijab is not an essential part of the Islamic religion. Wherever this issue has been raised, the High Court's opinion has been consistent that wearing a headscarf (hijab) for women is not an essential part of the Islamic religion."

It is not as if the religion would be in danger without it, or that a woman would be excluded from the religion if she did not wear it. No facts or evidence had been presented to prove this either, said the court.

In its verdict, the Allahabad High Court referred to an old judgment of the Kerala, Bombay, and Karnataka High Courts. In the case of 'Fatima Tasneem vs State of Kerala', the court had stated that while on the one hand, a student had the right to wear clothes of their choice, on the other hand, a school or institution had the right to enforce its own rules and regulations.

It added that when there was a conflict or dispute between these two rights, the larger interest and discipline of the institution would be given more importance than individual preference.

The court stated that the school was not imposing any restrictions on the student's faith, but was merely expecting adherence to institutional discipline and uniforms. Following this, the court dismissed the petition.

FCRA Bill 2026: Why asset control, registration rules and government powers are raising concerns?

BPSC exam row: Students break barricades near Bihar CM residence, do rain dance amid water cannons

SC rejects ex-Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal's plea, directs him to surrender in two weeks

On caste census, Kharge and Rahul urge PM to formulate new questionnaire after wider consultations

Parandur airport row: TVK defends decision to scrap project in Assembly; Opposition hits back

SCROLL FOR NEXT