Right to Freedom of Religion in India (UPSC Polity)

The right to freedom of religion is one of the most distinctive features of the Indian Constitution. Unlike the strict separation model of the United States or the laïcité model of France, India adopts a model of principled distance — active engagement with religion when needed, equal respect for all faiths, and a constitutional commitment to secularism as part of the Preamble and the basic structure. For UPSC Polity, this topic is tested under Fundamental Rights, minority rights, and secularism.

The Constitutional Architecture

Preamble: Secular Republic

The word "secular" was inserted by the 42nd Amendment, 1976. The Supreme Court in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) held that secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution.

Equality (Articles 14-18)

• Article 14 — equality before the law and equal protection of laws.
• Article 15(1) — prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.

Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28)

• Article 25 — Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion (regulates individual-state relationship).
• Article 26 — Freedom to manage religious affairs by religious denominations (regulates state-religion relationship).
• Article 27 — Freedom from taxes for the promotion of any particular religion.
• Article 28 — Freedom from religious instruction in certain state-funded educational institutions.

Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29-30)

• Article 29 — Protection of interests of minorities.
• Article 30 — Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.

Indian Secularism: Principled Distance

The Indian model of secularism is captured by the phrase "Sarva Dharma Sama Bhava" — equal respect for all religions. Scholar Rajeev Bhargava has called this "principled distance":

• The state does not mechanically distance itself from religion.
• It engages as required — to promote reform, equality, and minority protection — but maintains equal respect.
• It can intervene in religion (for reform) and also abstain (to protect autonomy).

Critiques of Indian Secularism

Political scientist Pratap Bhanu Mehta has offered sharp criticism:

• In theory, Indian secularism appears rational; in practice, it offers wide scope for ambiguity.
• It has at times legitimised vote-bank politics, with parties placating different communities at different times.
• Flirting with all religions simultaneously is no longer viable in a polarised political environment.
• The notion of "principled distance" can become a cover for majoritarian accommodation or minority appeasement depending on political convenience.
• Mehta warns that the Indian model can keep all communities insecure if not backed by a principled framework.

Western vs Indian Secularism

Conceptual Framework

• Western secularism — strict separation between religion and state, inspired by Enlightenment values that advocate individual liberty and rationality. This model promotes the privatisation of religion.
• Indian secularism — principled distance between religion and state. It recognises the importance of religion in public life and seeks to balance individual and community rights without enforcing the privatisation of religion.

Approach to Religion

• Western: Excludes religion from state affairs to protect individual rights and promote rational governance.
• Indian: Embraces mutual respect among all religions and allows religious considerations in public life while ensuring equal treatment and enabling state intervention for social reform.

Legal and Constitutional Provisions

• Western: Clear separation of church and state (e.g., First Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits an establishment of religion).
• Indian: The Constitution allows the state to intervene in religious matters to ensure equality and social justice — Articles 25-30 guarantee religious freedoms while allowing state intervention for reform (e.g., banning untouchability, temple entry, triple talaq).

Historical Development

• Western: Evolved primarily in homogeneous Christian societies, focusing on curbing the political power of the church.
• Indian: Developed in a context of deep religious diversity and historical conflicts. It aims to foster coexistence in a pluralistic society, addressing both inter-religious and intra-religious inequalities.

State and Religion Interaction

• Western: Hands-off approach — avoiding any form of endorsement.
• Indian: The state can engage with religious institutions to ensure social reform and protect the rights of marginalised communities.

Values and Goals

• Western: Prioritises individual autonomy and the rational, non-religious basis of the state. Often equates secularism with modernity.
• Indian: Integrates multiple values — religious liberty, social reform, communal harmony — aiming for harmonious coexistence rather than privatisation.

Summary Comparison

Article 25: Freedom of Conscience and Religion

Article 25 guarantees to "all persons" (citizens and non-citizens):

• Freedom of conscience — inner religious belief.
• Freedom to profess, practise, and propagate religion — outward expression.

The right is subject to public order, morality, health, and other provisions of Part III. The state can:

• Regulate secular activities associated with religious practice (Art. 25(2)(a)).
• Provide for social welfare and reform, throwing open Hindu religious institutions to all classes of Hindus (Art. 25(2)(b)).

Article 26: Freedom to Manage Religious Affairs

Subject to public order, morality, and health, every religious denomination has the right to:

• Establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes.
• Manage its own affairs in matters of religion.
• Own and acquire property.
• Administer property in accordance with law.

Article 27: No Taxation for Religion

No person shall be compelled to pay any tax specifically appropriated for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion.

Article 28: No Religious Instruction in State Institutions

Religious instruction shall not be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained out of state funds. In state-aided institutions, students cannot be compelled to attend religious instruction.

The Essential Religious Practices Doctrine

The Supreme Court has developed the "essential religious practices" (ERP) doctrine — only those practices that are integral to a religion receive constitutional protection under Articles 25-26. The state can regulate non-essential practices. Landmark applications include:

• Shirur Mutt (1954) — origin of the doctrine.
• Triple Talaq (Shayara Bano, 2017) — held not essential to Islam.
• Sabarimala (2018) — exclusion of women aged 10-50 held not essential.
• Haji Ali Dargah (2016, Bombay HC) — women allowed into the sanctum.

Latest Developments (2024-26)

• Places of Worship Act, 1991 — constitutional challenge pending before the Supreme Court on whether the law foreclosing disputes over religious sites is valid.
• Uniform Civil Code (UCC) — Uttarakhand enacted a UCC in 2024; other states exploring.
• Hijab case (Aishat Shifa) — 2022 split verdict, pending before larger bench.
• Anti-conversion laws in several states face constitutional challenges.
• Madrasa education — Allahabad HC declared UP Madrasa Act unconstitutional; Supreme Court stayed the ruling (2024).

UPSC Relevance

GS-II mapping: Indian Constitution — Fundamental Rights; secularism; minority rights; comparative constitutional models.

Prelims bullets:

• Articles 25-28 — right to freedom of religion.
• Articles 29-30 — cultural and educational rights of minorities.
• "Secular" added by 42nd Amendment, 1976; secularism is basic structure (Bommai, 1994).
• Essential Religious Practices doctrine from Shirur Mutt (1954).
• Indian model: principled distance; Western model: strict separation.

Mains angles:

• "Indian secularism is not an antonym of religion but a mode of ordering religious plurality." Discuss.
• Compare and contrast Indian and Western models of secularism.
• Critically examine the Essential Religious Practices doctrine as applied by the Supreme Court.
• Has the state's role in religious reform expanded or contracted in the last decade?

PDF