Religion and The Secular State: Indian Perspective: Mittal v. Union of India AIR 1983 SC 1
Religion and The Secular State: Indian Perspective: Mittal v. Union of India AIR 1983 SC 1
I. SOCIAL CONTEXT
India is an ancient land of religious pluralism and cultural diversity. This largest
democracy on the globe is a federation of 35 constituents – 28 full-fledged States and
seven Union Territories, two of which are self-governing and the rest ruled by the central
government. The Hindu religion is predominant in as many as 29 of these constituents, its
followers having a nearly 80 percent share in a country population of over a billion. 1
The 160 million Muslims of India – with a predominant Sunni majority – are the
country’s second largest community. 2 They are an overwhelming majority in Kashmir and
Lakshadweep, a third of the population in Assam, about a quarter each in Kerala and West
Bengal, and a fifth in the country’s most populous state – Uttar Pradesh – while there is a
sizable number of Muslim-majority districts, cities and townships situated in various parts
of the country.
With a headcount of nearly 24 million, the Christians – with a predominant Catholic
majority – are the country’s third largest community. 3 They are a majority in three north-
eastern states – Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland – and their population is much higher
than the national average (2.5 percent) in Andamans, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Kerala and
Manipur.
The Sikhs, with a total population of 16 million, are the majority in the state of
Punjab and a minority everywhere else. Next to them are 8 million Buddhists – having a
high percentage of population in Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh and the Laddakh area of
Kashmir – followed by 3.5 million Jains scattered all over the country. 4 Besides these,
there are small Zoroastrian, Jewish and Baha’i groups and a number of tribal faiths
prevailing in certain parts of the country whose entity as separate religions is specifically
recognized by State law and judicial decisions. 5
DR. TAHIR MAHMOUD, Member, Law Commission of India, is a renowned jurist specializing in Islamic Law,
Hindu Law, Religion and Law, and Law Relating to Minorities. He has been Dean, Faculty of Law, University
of Delhi, Chairman, National Commission for Minorities, Member, National Human Rights Commission and
Jurist-Member, Ranganath Misra Commission.
1. There is an official census in India now every ten years. The approximate population figures for all
communities given here are based on the Census Report of 2001.
2. Among the minority Muslim groups are the Ithna Ashari Shi’as and the Isma’ilis.
3. The Census Reports mention Catholics and Protestants separately. Among the many other Christian groups
are the Presbytarians, dominant in northeastern states.
4. Among the Buddhists the Mahamayana group is dominant, while the Jains are divided into Digambar and
Swetambar sects.
5. Many of these are separately mentioned in the Census Reports. A leading case on their legal status is SP
Mittal v. Union of India AIR 1983 SC 1.
387
388 RELIGION AND THE SECULAR STATE
Constitution-making since the advent of freedom, demands were made for the protection
of certain religious traditions in the national charter under preparation, and some of these
had to be accommodated.6
A quasi-secular ideology remained dominant in State affairs for about half a century
after independence, but throughout these years certain concessions had to be periodically
made in favor of particular religions. Towards the fag end of the 20 th century, the majority
community’s protagonists of a different ideology that they called “Hindutva” took over
the reigns of the nation and their ideology of “cultural nationalism” remained dominant in
the country’s governance throughout their six-year rule.7 They remain in political control
over certain regions, but, for the time being, not at the federal level. Existence of these
two competing political ideologies – one believing, in principle, in equality of all religions
and the other in a privileged position for the historically oldest religion of the country –
seems to have become a permanent feature of the Indian polity. On the whole, the favored
ideology regarding the state-religion relationship in general is of a liberal cooperation –
not of a rigid separation.
In a leading case, the Supreme Court of India stated that secularism is “more than a
passive attitude of religious tolerance; it is a positive concept of equal treatment of all
religions,” asserting at the same time that “when the State allows citizens to profess and
practise religion it does not either explicitly or impliedly allow them to introduce religion
into non-religious and secular activities of the State.” 8 The idea that Hindutva was much
more than merely a religious ideology once got active support from the country’s apex
court, but, as it evoked public outcry, the court had to issue a supplementary decision that
its ruling did not mean to dilute the Indian concept of secularism. 9
6. The Constitution was adopted by the Constituent Assembly on 26 November 1949 and enforced with
effect from 26 January 1950.
7. A derivative from the name of the majority religion (Hindusim), the word Hindutva indicates an ideology
which insists on the religio-cultural beliefs and practices of the majority community being an essential attribute
of patriotism, national culture and social practice.
8. SR Bommai v. Union of India (1994) 3 SCC 1.
9. See the multiple so-called “Hindutva judgments” and the clarification ruling, all reported in the 1996
volume of Supreme Court Cases.
10. CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950, Preamble & art. 15-16.
11. The Preamble now describes India as a “sovereign, democratic, socialist and secular republic” – the
words “socialist and secular” added by the 1976 amendment.
NATIONAL REPORT: INDIA 389
State in the interest of public order, morality, health, and other provisions of the
Constitution.12 At the same time, all religious communities and every “denomination
thereof” are guaranteed freedom to manage their own affairs in religion, acquire and
mange property and establish institutions for religious and charitable purposes. 13 The
Constitution, however, makes it specifically clear that these guarantees for religious
freedom will not preclude the State from introducing social reforms by law or from
“regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which
may be associated with religious practice.”14
In recognition of the nation’s religio-cultural diversity the Constitution entitles every
section of citizens in all regions of the country to conserve its distinct culture, language
and script, imposing at the same time on all citizens a Fundamental Duty “to value and
preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture.”15
Though the Constitution does not specify any “preferred or privileged” religion, there
are in it some special religion-based provisions relating to the majority community. Its
chapter on people’s Fundamental Rights declares that “untouchability”-- an age-old
practice associated with Hindu religion according to which high-caste people have to keep
a distance from members of the so-called lower castes – is abolished and its practice in
any form is prohibited.16 On the other hand, the chapter on Directive Principles of State
Policy under the Constitution directs the State to protect by law the holy cow (without, of
course, a reference to the Hindu reverence for it). 17 Moreover, certain denominational
Hindu temples in two South Indian states – Kerala and Tamil Nadu – must, by a
constitutional dictate, receive prescribed subsidies from public funds. 18
There is no provision in the Constitution directing the State to remain neutral to
religious issues; nor does it specifically ask the State to cooperate with the religious
communities in respect to their faith affairs. The mandate is only for non-discrimination
between people on religious grounds. The silence of the Constitution on this issue is taken
as tacit approval for State intervention in religious affairs of all communities, and all
organs of the State – legislature, executive and judiciary – have accordingly been taking
active interest in such affairs in a way that may be inconceivable under a rigidly secular
political set up. The legislative and administrative measures of this nature are financed by
the State exchequer, and their validity is well-established despite the Constitutional ban
on collection of taxes meant for promoting particular religions. 19
Nowhere does the Constitution say or even remotely suggest that religion is to be the
foundation or source of state law. Nor is there such a provision for religion in any
legislative enactment. Parliament and state legislatures are empowered to make laws in
the areas of personal status, family relations and religious endowments, shrine
management and organization of inland and overseas pilgrimages, without saying that
these are to be drawn on religious sources. But in practice, religious tenets are usually
kept in mind while enacting such laws. Legislative enactments and administrative
regulations in these areas – both those of the pre-Constitution era since retained and those
enacted later – contain provisions based on religious sources.
The judiciary has in several cases interpreted Constitutional provisions relating to
religious freedom to lay down its parameters and boundaries. A distinction has been made
between “essential” and “non-essential” practices of religion, holding that the
Constitution necessarily protects the former and not always the latter. In many cases, the
judiciary itself has dwelt on religious beliefs to determine if an allegedly religious practice
is “essential” or not. Sometimes the criterion adopted for this purpose has been how a
27. National Commission for Minorities Act 1992. This author was the Commission’s Chair for three years
during 1996-99.
28. State Minorites Commissions are operative in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Delhi, Karnataka, Madhya
Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal.
29. A critical evaluation of the working of these bodies may be seen in this author’s book Minorities
Commission: Minor Role in Major Affairs (Pharos Media: 2001).
30. CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950, art. 325.
31. Welfare Ministry’s Notification of 27 May 1993 issued under Section 2 of the National Commission for
Minorities Act 1992.
32. Bal Patil v. Union of India (2005) 6 SCC 690.
392 RELIGION AND THE SECULAR STATE
Elaborate security arrangements and public facilities are provided by the State authorities
at religious places and pilgrimage sites attracting large crowds.
Many religious buildings and places have been included among the protected
monuments and archeological sites managed by State authorities functioning under
central and state laws. These laws prevent the State from changing the religious
character of such buildings and sites, 40 but congregational prayers are not allowed
in many old mosques which the Muslim community resists.
Under several state laws, construction of new religious places or renovation of
old ones requires prior official sanction. 41 Unauthorized construction of religious
places on public lands has nevertheless been and remains an unchecked menace.
Very recently, the Supreme Court of India has taken notice of the trend and directed
the government to take remedial measures. 42 A general law relating to places of
worship enacted in 1988 prohibits use of all religious institutions for promotion or
propagation of any political activity, harbouring criminals, storing arms and ammunition,
keeping contraband goods, putting up an authorized construction or fortification, carrying
on any unlawful or subversive act, and promoting disharmony or feelings of enmity
between various religious groups, etc. 43 Certain ancient religious practices of the Hindus
relating to shrines have been prohibited by penal legislation. Among them are the customs
of devadasi (perpetual dedication of young girls to deities), and sati (immolation of a
deceased person’s widow on his funeral pyre).44
In recent years a historically unsubstantiated belief propounded by some groups of
Hindu religious leaders claim, that the site of an ancient mosque in the holy city of
Ayodhya was the spot where the most popular Hindu god, Ram, was born in the pre-
historic past, led to an enormous religious conflict. When the conflict was at its height and
was spreading to some other old mosques too, Parliament enacted a law declaring that all
places of worship in the country would retain their specific religious identity and
affiliation as on the Independence Day (15 August 1947) and any attempt to convert a
shrine belonging to one religion into that of any other will be a punishable offense. 45 The
infamous Ayodhya mosque conflict which had already reached a point of no-return had to
be specifically exempted from the scope of this law which was meant to ensure protection
of other non-Hindu shrines from such disputes. While the long-drawn out litigation
relating to the Ayodhya dispute was yet to be decided, the mosque was demolished in a
mob frenzy – after which the site was acquired by the government through a special law. 46
Another dispute relating to the Hindu god Ram relates to a part of the sea in South
India. The government’s plan to build a dam there was challenged in the Supreme Court
by a group of Hindu religious leaders claiming it to be the spot where Ram’s army had
built a bridge to cross over to Lanka to fight the demon king Ravana. The court stayed the
proposed action and has yet to finally dispose of the case.
Under the control of the same Ministry the great Haj pilgrimage of the Muslims is managed by a Central Haj
Committee consituted and functioning under the Haj Committee Act 2002 – and on almost all international
airports of the country there are separate “Haj Terminals.”
40. See, e.g., Ancient Monuments and Archeological Sites and Remains Act 1958, Sections 5 and 16.
41. See, e,g,, Rajasthan Religious Buildings and Places Act 1954, West Bengal Religious Buildings and
Places Act 1985, Punjab Religious Premises and Land (Eviction and Recovery) Act 1997.
42. Issued on 15 February 2010.
43. Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act 1988.
44. Madras Devadasis (Prevention of Dedication) Act 1947, Karnataka Devadasis (Prevention of Dedication)
Act 1982, central Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act 1987.
45. Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991.
46. Acquisition of Certain Sites at Ayodhya Act 1993.
394 RELIGION AND THE SECULAR STATE
Vedas with reverence, recognition of the fact that means of salvation are diverse and
realization of the truth that the number of gods to be worshipped is large, that indeed is
the distinguishing feature of Hindu religion,” observed the Supreme Court of India in a
leading judicial decision.47
There have been judicial decisions ruling that a ban on sale of non-vegetarian food in
the cities regarded holy by the Hindus, and teaching of astrology drawn on Hindu
scriptures in State universities, do not contravene provisions of the Constitution relating to
freedom of trade and vocation and religious freedom respectively. 48 While the Hindu
family-law enactments of 1955-56 clarify that the word “Hindu” applies to all its “forms
and developments” (especially signifying some of these including the Aryasamaj), 49 in
numerous cases the courts have examined the tenets of various denominations and cults to
rule that they are part and parcel of the Hindu religion. 50 In some cases, the courts have
adjudicated also on religious disputes between the Hindus and one or another of the other
three communities legally bracketed with them (as stated above). In a leading case, a High
Court had to adjudicate a dispute between Hindus and Jains on the issue if a Jain temple
could house a Hindu religious symbol.51
Disputes relating to Islamic beliefs and practices also often reach the judiciary.
Besides entertaining and deciding in some case Sunni-Shi’a disputes over use of mosques
and religious rituals, the courts have also examined the creed of the Ahmadiya community
regarded by mainstream Muslims as heretics since they regard its founder a “sub-prophet”
(running contrary to the mainstream Muslim belief that there can be no prophet after
Muhammad), and decided that they are Muslim 52
The pivotal place of the Holy Qur’an in the Muslim faith, and of the Granth Sahib in
the Sikh religion, have been examined and testified in some judicial decisions. 53 The
courts have also entertained and decided religious disputes among various denominations
and groups of the Christians and their churches. 54 In a recent case the right of Parsi
Zoroastrians to build a residential colony (on a state-allotted land) reserved for their co-
religionists was upheld.55 Administrative bans on offering prayers on the roads outside the
mosques have always been upheld.56 Similar restrictions on the use of voice-amplifiers in
the religious places of Hindus, Muslims and Christians, have been uniformly upheld by
the courts.57 The Jehovah’s Witnesses, who consider singing of the National Anthem to be
against their faith, have succeeded in obtaining a Supreme Court verdict in their favor. 58
funding from outside India. All associations having a “definite religious program”
wishing to receive foreign contributions are required by law to register themselves with
State authorities and inform them of each such contribution received. In the absence of
such registration they need to seek prior clearance for every such transaction. 59
Religious entities can seek voluntary registration under state laws on fulfilling certain
conditions and this makes them sui generis.60 A number of state laws exempt religious
institutions or faith-based practices from their general provisions – among such laws
being those relating to business, taxation, acquisition of private property by the State,
policing, and security forces.61
The court however stopped short of giving any binding ruling in the matter, and the
ideology of religion and politics mix remains intact.
Though members of bureaucracy and armed forces are not allowed to directly
participate in general elections, many of them are influenced by the ideology of the
religio-political organizations operative in the country, and this is bound to adversely
affect in practice the theoretical neutrality of the State to religion. No law has, however,
been enacted to tackle this rather ticklish problem.
A social stratification called the “caste” system is part and parcel of the Indian
society as a whole. Mistreating the so-called “lower” castes is declared to be an offense
under the Constitution which also prohibits discrimination between citizens on the ground
of caste, yet the State can make “any special provision” for what the Constitution calls the
“Scheduled Castes.”65 Such special provisions have been extensively made for them in
several ways – reserved electoral constituencies, quotas in government employments and
“triple-benefits” (quota, lower eligibility criteria, and rebate in payable fee) in educational
institutions. The national policy is to give a fair representation to the Scheduled Castes in
all government departments and at all levels. Two special laws have been enacted to
prescribe stringent penalties for those degrading them or violating their civil rights.66
Under the Constitution, the list of Scheduled Castes was to be initially specified by
the government (in the name of the President), and Parliament was given the power to
amend and update the lists from time to time.67 The Scheduled Caste net is until this day
restricted to three chosen communities – Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists. 68 The so-called
“lower castes” are vocation-based and are shared by all Indian communities, yet Muslims
and Christians (including the low-caste Hindus converting to these religions) have been
persistently kept out of the ambit of Scheduled Castes on the plea that their egalitarian
faiths as known to the rest of the world do not recognize the caste system. Both these
communities have recently challenged the discriminatory law before the Supreme Court
which has yet to arrive at a decision. Presence of a large number of religion-specific
Scheduled Caste politicians and public servants in the central and state governments, as
also in local bodies like district boards and city corporations, aggravates the already
existing situation of imbalance of various religious communities’ representation in the
governance of the country.
Despite being the second largest religious community of the country, the Muslims are
overly under-represented – in many cases unrepresented – in the governance of the
country. Neither in the three organs of the State nor in bureaucracy does the extent of their
presence go anywhere near their population figures. This has been confirmed time and
again both by special committees constituted by the government and the various
Minorities Commissions referred to above. Leaders of the community have since long
been demanding a quota in government jobs and educational institutions, but the demand
has never found favor with the rulers who believe that this would be contrary to the
provision of the Constitution against religion-based discrimination between citizens. In
two south Indian states, this demand has been implemented to a certain extent, and a
fourth state, in eastern India, has just announced the same, but the same step taken in a
third state has recently been struck down by the local High Court for being allegedly ultra
vires the Constitution.69
In 2004, the government had appointed a special national Commission to examine
this demand of the Muslims and other religious minorities but its report submitted three
years later recommending quota for them by way of positive discrimination and
affirmative action is still unattended to by the government. 70 This Commission has also
recommended that the Scheduled Castes net be made religion-neutral, but the proposal is
being strongly opposed by various political groups and the government has not yet shown
any inclination to take action on it.
71. All India Imams Organization v. Union of India AIR 1993 SC 2086.
72. CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950, art. 44.
73. The two laws on this subject are the Special Marriage Act 1954 and the Foreign Marriage Act 1969.
74. Codified community-specific laws are the Christian Marriage Act 1872, Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act
1936 and Hindu Marriage Act 1955.
75. Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Hindu Succession Act 1956.
76. Special Marriage Act 1954, Section 21-A, Indian Succession Act 1925.
77. See Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Section 7 (all communities), Anand Marriage Act 1909 (Sikhs), Babay v.
Jayant AIR 1981 Bom 283 (Buddhists).
78. Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Secion 13 (1) (iii).
79. See such provisions in the four Hindu-law Acts of 1955-56.
398 RELIGION AND THE SECULAR STATE
law of the British period still in force which (with an unacknowledged aim of promoting
conversion of the natives to the then rulers’ religion – Christianity) had provided that
change of religion would not result in loss of civil rights. 80 Since that law protects only
the converting persons, the courts have upheld the provision of the modern Hindu
succession law that children born to a Hindu convert after his or her conversion would not
inherit from any of their Hindu relatives unless they reconvert to Hinduism before
succession in any case opens.81
The Muslim family and succession laws remain fully applicable to the Muslims,
except if one opts for a civil marriage in which case secular laws of marriage and
succession become applicable (whether it is a marriage within the Muslim community or
outside it). Some aspects of Muslim law have been turned into statutes based on Islamic
sources.82 The secular law of transfer of property exempts from its scope the Muslim law
of gifts, and gifts made in accordance with Islamic law take full legal effect.83
The Indian Penal Code regards bigamy as an offense only if the family law applicable
to a case treats a bigamous marriage as void. 84 The Muslims (men only) therefore remain
exempt from its ambit, while all other communities are now covered by this provision.
This situation resulted into numerous cases of fake conversion to Islam by non-Muslim
married men (including Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims and Christians) for the purpose of
defeating anti-bigamy provisions of the laws applicable to them. The practice of such
unscrupulous conversion by non-Muslims to Islam (under a mistaken belief that it gives
them a free hand to indulge in bigamy) has now been stopped by the Supreme Court of
India, laying down that a non-Muslim husband cannot remarry even after conversion to
Islam without getting the first marriage dissolved. 85 The provisions of the Civil Service
Regulations, both central and provincial, requiring civil servants to obtain government’s
prior consent before entering into a bigamous marriage (or, in the case of a woman
employee, marrying a man who is already married) now apply only to the Muslims but are
seldom used.86 The validity of such provisions has in some cases been challenged for their
alleged conflict with the religious-freedom clauses of the Constitution, but the courts
provided no relief.87
The rule of Muslim law that apostasy of a husband would automatically dissolve the
marriage and that the wife can thereupon marry someone else (without attracting anti-
bigamy provisions of the Penal Code) remains in force, but the corresponding rule
regarding a Muslim wife’s apostasy is no more enforceable by virtue of a statutory
provision. This provision has an exception to its rule meant to encourage re-conversion of
women converting to Islam – if a non-Muslim woman marries a Muslim after converting
to Islam but later reverts to her birth religion, her marriage to the Muslim husband would
be automatically dissolved. 88
The Christians are governed by marriage and divorce laws codified in the 19 th century
on the basis of laws then in force in Britain.89 The provisions of these laws extending
them also to marriages only one party to which is a Christian remain intact, but such
marriages can also now take place under the general law of civil marriages. The Parsi
Zoroastrians are governed by an old statute drawn on their religious sources. 90 The
general law of succession – which exempts Hindus and Muslims from many of its
provisions – contains two separate chapters applicable to Christians and Parsis, both based
on religious principles.91 Religious courts of various communities, known by different
names, remain operative in various parts of the country. The Parsi matrimonial courts and
Church of Scotland Kirk Sessions among these have statutory recognition, 92 while
decisions of the other such courts operating privately may be recognized by secular courts
in their discretion as arbitration awards. In a writ petition challenging the constitutional
validity of Muslim Shari’a at courts, pending for decision for long in the Supreme Court
of India, the government has defended the system arguing that it is a form of alternative
dispute resolution (ADR) which lessens the burden of State courts.
100. See, e.g,, Ramanbhai v. Dabhi AIR 1965 SC 669, Manohar Joshi v. Nitin Patil (1996) 1 SCC 169.
101. CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950, art. 25, Explanation I.
102. Case decided in December 2009.
103. Sikdar v. CEO 1961 Cal 289, Peeran Saheb v. Collector AIR 1988 AP 377.
104. Indian Penal Code 1860, Sections 153A, 153B, 295-298.
NATIONAL REPORT: INDIA 401