By Krishna Kant Choubey

Published on: January 22, 2024 at 13:11 IST

Freedom of religion is a fundamental right in India, an aspect of individual freedom and a commitment to a diversified and diverse society. It is codified in the Indian Constitution, which protects an individual’s right to hold and express their beliefs while also provides a comprehensive provisions for promoting harmonious relations among different kinds of religions.

In India, freedom of religion refers to an individual’s right to profess, practice, and spread their faith without fear of discrimination. This right extends beyond personal boundaries, including religious practices, rituals, and ceremonies, as well as the right to spread one’s faith through circulation.

The Indian Constitution, adopted in 1950, protects religious freedom under Articles 25–28, which are part of the Fundamental Rights stated in Part III. Article 25 ensures every individual’s right to profess, practice, and spread their religion, subject to certain limitations such as public order, morality, and health. Article 26 grants religious institutions the ability to take care of their own religious affairs, while the state retains the jurisdiction to regulate secular activity associated with religious institutions. Article 27 bans the imposition of taxes to promote or support any particular religion, ensuring that public money is not used to favor one religion over another. These provisions ensure that religious freedom is maintained and upheld in India.

This article provides an overview of the concept of freedom of Religious Faith in India and this article also focuses on the constitutional provisions regarding the freedom of religion in India and challenges with regards to it.

Constitutional Provisions

Articles 25,26,27, 28 of the Indian Constitution protect and balance individuals’ rights to profess, practice, and promote their religion while taking into consideration wider community interests. These provisions establish fundamental provisions for religious liberty.

• Freedom of Conscience and Free Profession, Practice, and Propagation of Religion

Article 25 of the Indian Constitution protects freedom of conscience, allowing individuals to practice and propagate their religion.

While acknowledging these rights as fundamental, it also acknowledges limitations in public order, morality, and health. This provision contributes to India’s commitment to a diverse and pluralistic society and protects religious and charitable institutions, emphasizing religious autonomy within the broader constitutional framework.

While Article 25 establishes the freedom of religion, it also recognizes the state’s authority to regulate or restrict activities associated with religious practices. This delicate balance acknowledges the need to prevent activities that may undermine public order, health, or morality, while respecting the core tenets of religious freedom.

• Freedom to Manage Religious Affairs

Article 26 of the Indian Constitution allows religious communities to administer their own religious affairs, including rites, ceremonies, and customs. This freedom recognizes the wide range of religious institutions and permits them to function independently and without outside interference. However, the State can act in particular circumstances to promote social welfare, reform, or public order.

Article 26 seeks to maintain religious institutions’ freedom while combining their activities with larger social objectives. It highlights the harmony of many faiths and traditions, resulting in a harmonious society in which religious communities can govern themselves while upholding justice, order, and welfare.

• Freedom from Payment of Taxes for Promotion of any Particular Religion

Article 27 of the Indian Constitution protects from compulsory financial support for any specific faith through taxation.

It prevents the imposition of taxes for the promotion or

preservation of a specific religion, expressing a commitment to secularism. This section protects individual taxpayers from being compelled to make financial contributions to the spreading of a specific faith, maintaining the principle of religious equality in governmental activities. Article 27 protects the right to religious freedom and prohibits the state from unreasonably promoting or favoring one religion over another. It upholds the secular foundation of the Indian state andensures that public money are spent for the common benefit of all residents, regardless of religious affiliation.

• Freedom as to Attendance at Religious Instruction or Religious Worship in Certain Educational Institutions

Article 28 of the Indian Constitution protects the freedom to attend religious instruction or worship in certain educational institutions. It prevents compulsory faith instruction or worship in state-run institutions, enabling students to express their own views without interference. However, it also declares the right to provide religious instruction while keeping it optional and respecting students’ diverse opinions. The provision supports a secular and inclusive education system in India, guaranteeing that educational institutions remain places where students can freely practice their own beliefs without interference.

Uniform Civil Code and Freedom of Religion in India

The Uniform Civil Code, a constitutional principle incorporated in Article 44 of the Indian Constitution, proposes to develop a uniform set of rules for all citizens, regardless of religious beliefs, promoting gender justice, equality, and secularism by replacing personal laws based on religious practices.

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) proposal in India aims to provide more equal legal provisions, particularly in marriage, divorce, and inheritance, but faces criticism due to concerns about interference on religious freedoms and the difficult stability between uniformity and religious freedom.

• Minority Rights

Article 29 and Article 30 of the Indian Constitution talks about the rights of minorities to conserve their culture granting minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions. The laws promote religious freedom through supporting diversity and preserving minority identities. However, issues remain in meeting these rights, asking for constant attempts to balance individual religious freedoms with the larger societal material, regardless of their intended purpose.

Anti-Conversion Laws

Several states, including Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, and Uttarakhand, have enacted anti-conversion laws. These laws typically require individuals seeking to convert to a different religion to provide advance notice to the district magistrate or other authorities.

The failure to comply with these requirements may result in legal consequences, including the nullification of the conversion. Religious conversion laws in India require individuals or groups to obtain prior permission from authorities to avoid forced or fraudulent conversions. They protect vulnerable individuals from coercion, but critics argue they can interfere with the right to freedom of religion guaranteed under the Indian Constitution.

The constitutional validity of anti-conversion laws has been challenged in various courts. Courts have sometimes upheld these laws while highlighting the need to ensure that they do not violate the fundamental right to freedom of religion. The debate surrounding these laws reflects the broader tension in India between the protection of religious freedom and concerns about potential abuses or coercive practices related to religious conversions.

Safeguards Against Discrimination:

To prevent discrimination based on religion, Article 15 of the Constitution prohibits the state from discriminating against any citizen on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. This ensures that access to educational institutions, public spaces, and employment opportunities remain free from religious bias.

Challenges and Concerns

Despite the constitutional safeguards and legal provisions, challenges persist. Incidents of communal tension, religious intolerance, and instances of violence based on religious differences have been reported. Striking a balance between individual freedom and maintaining social harmony remains an ongoing challenge.

Case law

• Sri Sidhanta Siva Sankara Desika Bhashyam v. The State of Madras, (1954)

The famous case also known as Shirur Mutt Case is a landmark legal case. The Supreme Court upheld Hindu religious institutions’ autonomy, allowing them to conduct their own religious affairs. The case was based on the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act of 1951, which was based to regulate Hindu religious institutions.

The Court pointed out that the state could regulate secular activities but not interfere with fundamental religious practices and the Judgment in the Shirur Mutt Case shows that the term “religious denomination” is not restricted to well-known or ancient religious groups but includes any religious group with a common faith, common organization, and a distinctive name. The decision also declares that the state could regulate secular activities of a religious institution but could not interfere with its essential religious practices.

• Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb Case (1962)

The Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb Case (1962) was a landmark legal case related to a succession dispute in the Dawoodi Bohra community, a Shia Muslim community.

The dispute involves Mufaddal Saifuddin’s nomination as heir, ignoring his eldest son Sardar Saifuddin. The Bombay High Court declared the appointment, demonstrating the head’s jurisdiction over spiritual leadership and succession. The court underlined the notion of “Taziya,” which gives the religious leader sole control over spiritual concerns and the appointment of his successor. This ruling supported religious denominations’ autonomy and set a precedent for limited intervention in religious succession within communities

Conclusion

Freedom of religion is a fundamental right granted by Indian constitutional law, allowing individuals to practice and promote their faith while promoting religious institutions’ autonomy. The constitutional provisions maintain a balance between religious freedom, public order, morality, and health. The Shirur Mutt Case (1954) upheld religious denominations’ autonomy, and later decisions have defined the scope of this privilege. However, threats to religious freedom include anti-conversion laws, arguments over a Uniform Civil Code, and worries about minority rights. These challenges require constant monitoring to ensure efficient implementation and maintain a balance between religious institutions’ autonomy and the state’s role to prevent discrimination and promote social justice.