India, which has the second largest population
in the world (over 1.25 billion), is also considered as the birth place of the
four major world religion: Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism. Yet, India is
one of the most diverse nations in terms of the religion, further Jain, Sikh
and Buddhist currently comes under the umbrella of Hindu, although there was
time when many people were not happy with this situation and there have also
been campaigns to have these religions administer separately. So now the question
arises that what is the definition of Religion? Well, the
oxford dictionary defines religion as the "Belief in and worship of a
superhuman controlling power, especially a personal god or gods"
and Emile Durkheim defined religion as "A unified system of
beliefs and practices relative to sacred things set apart and forbidden-
beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral called Church".
However Swami Vivekananda said "Religion is based on faith and belief
and in most cases consists only of different sect of theories that is the
reason why we find all religion quarreling with each other".
From these definitions we can say that there is no universal definition as to what exactly religion is. This appears to near unanimity that religion, generally, is a belief or faith in the existence of a supernatural being and the precepts which people follow for attaining salvation more of like a driving force.
From these definitions we can say that there is no universal definition as to what exactly religion is. This appears to near unanimity that religion, generally, is a belief or faith in the existence of a supernatural being and the precepts which people follow for attaining salvation more of like a driving force.
Religion in India
The term religion is not expressly defined
anywhere in the Indian Constitution but Supreme Court in several cases tried to
defined religion as in case of Commissioner H.R.E. v L.T. Swammiar 1954,
SC held that "Religion is a matter of faith with individuals or
communities and it is not necessarily theistic. A religion has its basis in a
system of beliefs or doctrines, which are regarded by those who prefer that
religion as conducive to their lay a code ethical rule for its followers to
accept"
India is a secular state with no state
religion where all religions are recognized and can peacefully co-exist.
Religion in India is characterized by a diversity of religious beliefs and
practices.
Throughout India’s history, religion has been an
important part of country’s culture. Religious diversity and religious
tolerance are both established in the country by the law. The Indian
constitution has declared the right to freedom of religion to be a fundamental
right. Among the seven nations of South Asia forming the South Asian
Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), India stands out as the only
country that has declared itself a secular state. In each of the remaining six
nations, one or another spiritual faith has the status of the officially
adopted or legally promoted religion- Buddhism in Bhutan and Sri
Lanka, Hinduism in Nepal and Islam in Bangladesh, Maldives, and
Pakistan.
So Constitutionally, India is a secular country and
therefore has no State religion thus there is freedom of religion as fundamental right (Art.25 to 28). Despite the clear incorporation of the principles
of religion in the constitution, its preamble did not then include the
word secular. This was of course not omission rather this was
intentionally done to avoid any misgiving. 26 years later the preamble to
the Constitution was amended to include the word "secular" (along
with socialist) in 42nd amendment act of the Indian
constitution in 1976, to declare India to be a "Sovereign Socialist
Secular Democratic and Republic". So now Secularism has been
pronounced by the Supreme Court of India to be a part of the basic structure of
the Indian constitution and cannot be done away with even by a constitutional
amendment. The controversy around religion in India has
been marked by a general hesitation on the part of the Supreme Court of India
to intervene in matters of religion. There was a famous case of The State of
Bombay vs. Narsu Appa Mali 1951, wherein the statutory prohibition of on
polygamy among the Hindus was questioned as contravening the right to freedom
of religion. The Bombay High Court ruled that this was a constitutional measure
of reform and upheld the impugned provision as valid. The Court went on to add
that even though this was valid as a reform measure (and hence not violative of
the freedom of religion) personal law doesn’t have to comply with part III of
the constitution that is fundamental right. Even though customs are part of the
laws that are required to comply with the fundamental rights provisions of the
constitution, personal law is distinct from the custom and falls beyond the
pale of the constitutional rights review. As an aside, the court add that since
polygamy had economic, religious and social justifications, it could not be
regarded as discrimination only of the grounds of sex and if reviewed, couldn’t
be held to be unconstitutional. This case is important because several
judgments from Supreme Court of India have used it as a point of reference
subsequently. The Indian Young lawyers’ Association vs. State Of Kerala (Sabarimala
Case) was another historical case of freedom of religion, where SC passed the
judgment in 4:1 on whether women between the
ages of 10 and 50 should be allowed to enter Kerala’s Sabarimala temple, it was
held that temples practice to exclude woman was unconstitutional and the
practice violated the fundamental right to freedom of religion
Article 25(1) of female worshippers. The court held that Sabarimala
pilgrims could not be a separate sect or religious denomination. The customs
are subjected to constitutional validity and prohibition of women entry to
temple in violation of the Fundamental Rights. Justice Chandrachud said, “Your
right to pray as a woman is not dependent on any law, it is a constitutional
right”. This case was big relief to the well wishers of the Constitution as
Supreme Court again proved itself as their Guardian Angel.
In 2019 The Parliament
passed The Citizenship amendment act and amended the citizenship act of 1955 by
providing a path to Indian Citizenship for migrants of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist,
Jain Parsi and Christian from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan who had
faced religious persecution in these Non-Secular (Islamic) countries (Before
Dec. 31 2014). It was argued by many political leaders that this act is
discrimination on the basis of religion and it was also argued that this act is
against the principle of secularism and there were protest all over the
countries but later Government and Eminent lawyers like Harish Salve had tried
to clear the doubts that this act is not discriminative rather it is a
intelligible differentia distinguishing persons which have rational nexus to
the object of classification.
So there have been many issues regarding
religion, freedom of religion in India but still India, the world’s largest
democracy remains as an example for world as a Secular state.
[Views are personal and author doesn’t intend to disrespect any person
or any community]
As of now, and as i read ,one thing which is very clear is that the word "Secularism" has not been emphasized so much before. There have been series of incidents which lead to over emphasis on the word secularism and one of such incident has been execution of CAA. I'm pretty certain that 80% approx of those people who went blindly after the word secularism and shouted at the peak of their voices how this very pillar of the Constitution has been shaken and is under threat did not even correctly knew what did this word mean, where did came from, whom does it imply to, what are its limitations etc. To be very honest even i didnot know that this word was added to the Preamble at the time of National emergency in India rather than by BR Ambedkar. It is really interesting that the writter, the compiler of the constitution must have gone through this word "Secular" while he was reading the constitution of other nations but omitted it which definetly would have been done for the nation's good. But the National Congress under its leadership and for their personal gains and for vote soliciting politics included this word in the Constitution and no body questioned it but the one's who did were doomed forever.
ReplyDeleteIt always comes to my mind why didn't people question the origin of Secularism ?
Well, perhaps this is right that secularism has never been emphasized this much that there were people on road and protesting and some of them were doing violence for the violation of secularism and it would not be incorrect if we say that majority of the protesters did not know about the secularism. And if we talk about the "secularism" then it is true that it was added by the 42nd Amendment in 1976, but the principles of secularism was discussed in the constituent assembly while they were making the constitution and that is why freedom of religion is available to every citizen of India as their fundamental right. Ans In 1970s what Congress party was in to? I don't think that even congress party can justify those acts that what they did to democracy, What they did with Socialism, what they did with constitutionalism and what they did with the cardinal principle of separation of power specially with judiciary.
DeleteHowever apart from that it's great to hear from you specially when you are not from legal field but yes you understand that you are a component of "society", for which these laws exist.
A law abiding citizen of the nation.
ReplyDelete