The Spirit of Secularism: India’s Journey Through Landmark Cases and Article 25

Topic 15: Article 25 of the Constitution of India

India is a country known for its secularism. It’s the birthplace of numerous religions, the only place where religion and culture are practiced in various forms. “Religion is that which grows out of, and gives expression to, the experience of the holy in its various aspects,” - Rudolph Otto.

Our Indian Constitution also recognizes the belief and faith people have in religion, making it a part of the Constitution under Article 25, and adding it to the Preamble by the 42nd Amendment Act. The word “Secularism” is dynamic and cannot be interpreted in a restricted sense. The Supreme Court of India in the case of S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) 3 SCC has defined the word secularism, stating its meaning as ‘equal treatment of all religions.’

In landmark cases like Keshavananda Bharti v. Union of India 1973 4 SCC 225, it was held that secularism is a basic feature of our Indian Constitution, and no provision of legislation can abridge this right. The Indian Judiciary has also, time and again, played a significant role in emphasizing the importance of religious freedom by upholding the right of every individual to follow their religious beliefs, passing judgments like The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments Madras v Shri Lakshmindar Thirtha Swamiyar of Shri Shirur Mutt 1954 AIR 282, State of Karnataka v (Dr.) Praveen Bhai Togadia (2004) 9 SCC, and Shayara Bano v. Union of India (AIR 2017 SCC 1388).

In Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala, 1987 AIR 748, a case that involved three students who refused to sing the national anthem of India on religious grounds, the court held that the conduct of the children standing up when the national anthem was sung proved the three students’ respect for the national anthem, along with their belief in their religion by not singing. This case is the perfect example of the balance of Article 19 (1), which gives the citizens of India their rights, and Article 25 of the Indian Constitution, giving the citizens the freedom to profess, practice, and propagate religion.

Additionally, the case of Rev. Stainislaus v State of Madhya Pradesh 1977 AIR 908, 1977 SCR (2) 611 has been used for the distinction between “propagation” and “conversion.” It was ruled that the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate is an absolute right, whereas the freedom to convert others to one’s own religion is not an absolute right.

From the above judgments, it is clear that India, being a secular country, allows its citizens to choose, practice, propagate, and even change his or her religion. Though the rights are not absolute, they are hand in hand with some restrictions imposed.

This article was written by Ms Bijal Parikh, Junior Attorney at Vis Legis Law Practice, Advocates .