The article looks at the question of how property is constitutive of identity. Dominance over material resources and formation of markers of identity are often conjoint processes aided by constitutional processes. We frame the discursive construction of property and public space in India through the judicial discourse on the hijab ban in colleges in the state of Karnataka. Courts often look at space as an autonomously existing physical object rather than a socially constructed arena to which access is granted or denied depending on one’s socio-cultural location. We suggest that this is a natural consequence of over emphasizing the ‘thingness’ of property as opposed to understanding the discursive and historically contingent nature of property rights. This has a direct relation with how certain identities are allowed the freedom to make public spaces their own while others, though occupying these ostensibly neutral spaces, are not allowed to ‘perform’ their identities.