Right to Freedom of Religion in India

The Home Ministry has said to the Supreme Court that the Right to Freedom does not include the right to convert other people to a particular religion, especially through fraud, deception, coercion.

Table of Contents

Right to Freedom of Religion in India

In India, everyone has the right to practice their own religion, as mentioned in Articles 25 to 28 of the Constitution. This freedom allows individuals to follow their beliefs without disturbing others. The Supreme Court of India emphasizes that being secular means not favoring any religion, ensuring no discrimination based on religion or caste.

India is home to many different cultures and religions, which makes the right to religious freedom very important. However, there are some limits to this right. These limits take into account things like health, morality, public order, social reform, and the general well-being of everyone.

Secularism?

Secularism means understanding and respecting different religions. The term originated in late medieval Europe. In 1948, KT Shah suggested adding “secular” to the Constitution’s Preamble, and while the assembly agreed on the idea, it wasn’t included at that time. Later, in 1976, the Indira Gandhi government added the word “secular” through the 42nd Amendment, known as the “Mini Constitution.”

In the important Ayodhya case, the Supreme Court affirmed that the Constitution promotes equality for all religions. Secularism in India thrives through tolerance and peaceful coexistence among its people.

Right to Freedom of Religion in Indian Constitution

Articles 25 to 28 of the Constitution of India grant the right to freedom of religion to not only individuals but also religious groups in India.

Article 25 (Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion)

Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees everyone in India the freedom of religion. It states that all individuals have the right to:

Freedom of conscience.
Freely profess, practice, and propagate their religion.

However, this freedom is subject to public order, morality, health, and existing laws, which can regulate:

Economic and political activities related to religion.
Social welfare and reform.
The opening of Hindu institutions accessible to all Hindus.

The Supreme Court has clarified that what constitutes an integral part of a religion depends on what the community regards as essential.

Important Cases:

Hasan Ali v. Mansoor Ali: The Bombay High Court affirmed that Articles 25 and 26 protect not only beliefs but also religious practices and rituals.

Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala: The Supreme Court ruled that expelling students for not singing the national anthem violated their religious freedom. Respectful silence was not disrespectful.

N. Aditya v. Travancore Devaswom Board: The court stated that a qualified person, regardless of caste, can be appointed as a priest.

M Ismail Faruqi v. Union of India: The Supreme Court held that mosques are not essential to Islam; Muslims can pray anywhere.

Triple Talaq Case: The Supreme Court ruled that the practice of triple talaq was unconstitutional, leading to the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.

Noise Pollution Cases: The Supreme Court emphasized that religious practices should not disturb others’ peace, setting restrictions on noise during prayers.

Limitations: The rights under Article 25 are not absolute and can be limited for reasons of public order and health.

Article 26 (Freedom to manage religious affairs)

Article 26 allows religious groups to:

Establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes.
Manage their religious affairs.
Own and acquire property.
Administer property according to the law.

The term “religious denomination” is not defined in the Constitution but was clarified by the Supreme Court. It refers to a group of individuals with a common faith.

Important Cases:

Bramchari Sidheshwar Bhai v. State of West Bengal: The court ruled that the Ram Krishna Mission could not claim minority status separate from Hinduism, as it is not a distinct religion.

Azeez Basha v. Union of India: The Supreme Court stated that the Aligarh Muslim University was established by law, not by the Muslim community, so it couldn’t claim special rights under Article 30.

Acharaj Singh v. State of Bihar: The court recognized established religious practices, like specific offerings to deities, as part of that religion.

Saifuddin Saheb v. State of Bombay: The court struck down a law that prevented excommunication, ruling it violated the community’s fundamental rights.

Bira Kishore Dev v. State of Orissa: The Supreme Court upheld a law that regulated the secular management of the Jagannath Temple, stating it didn’t infringe on religious rights.

Atheist Society of India v. Government of A.P.: The court rejected a challenge against religious practices at state functions, emphasizing the importance of religious freedom.

Limitations: The rights under Article 26 are not absolute. Religious practices cannot violate public order, morality, or health.

Article 27 (Freedom from payment of taxes for promotion of any particular religion):

Article 27 of the Constitution states that no one can be forced to pay taxes that are used to support any religion or religious group.

In the case Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar, the Madras government introduced a tax under the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, 1951. The petitioner argued that this tax was not valid. However, the Supreme Court ruled that even though it was a tax, its purpose was to help manage religious institutions properly.

Article 28 (Freedom to attend religious instructions):

Article 28 prohibits religious instruction in schools funded entirely by the state. However, this doesn’t apply to schools set up by trusts that require religious teaching. Students in state-funded schools are not obligated to participate in any religious activities.

In the case of D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab (1971), the court ruled that teaching about Guru Nanak’s life was academic, not religious instruction, and thus did not violate Article 28.
In Aruna Roy v. Union of India (2002), a challenge was made against the National Curriculum Framework for promoting values related to all religions. The court upheld that teaching about basic human values does not violate Article 28 and supports value-based education in society.

Laws on Right to Freedom of Religion Conversions

Currently, there are no central laws restricting or regulating religious conversions.
However, many Private Member Bills have been introduced in the Parliament, to regulate religious conversions. There are yet to be approved.
Many states have implemented laws to prevent forceful religious conversions.

Judicial Judgments on the Right to Freedom of Religion Conversion

Rev Stanislaus vs Madhya Pradesh, 1977: The Supreme Court of India had considered the issue whether the fundamental rights to practice and propagate religion also includes the right to convert.
- The court concluded that the right to propagate does not include the right to convert, and therefore had upheld the constitutional validity of the laws enacted by Madhya Pradesh and Odisha legislatures prohibiting conversion by force, fraud, or allurement.
Sarala Mudgal’s case in 1995: The Supreme Court had made observations regarding the necessity of having a unified Central Legislation on Religious Conversion.

Conclusion

India is a very diverse country with many religions. As a secular nation, it does not have an official religion, and every citizen has the right to choose, practice, spread, or change their religion. However, these rights come with certain restrictions. No one can use their religion to act against public policy or create disturbances or intolerance among people.