Article 25 of the Indian Constitution 

The concept of secularism is implicit in the Constitution of India in the Preamble as well as under fundamental rights. Freedom of Religion has been guaranteed in Constitution under Articles 25-28. 

Article 25 : Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion

Article 25 (1): Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion. 

What is religion? 

The term 'religion' is not defined in the Constitution and indeed it is a term which is hardly susceptible to any rigid definition. The SC has defined religion has its basis in a system of beliefs or doctrines which are regarded by those who profess that religion as conducive to their spiritual wellbeing, but it will not be correct to say that religion is nothing else but a doctrine of belief. 

Under article 25 (1) a person has two fold freedom - 

(A) freedom of conscience ; 

(B) freedom to profess, practice, and                      propagate religion. 

Profess - A religion means to declare freely and openly one's faith and belief. 

Practice- Religion is to perform the prescribed religious duties, rites and rituals, and to exhibit his religious beliefs and ideas by such acts as prescribed by religious order in which he believes. 

Propagate - Means to spread and publicize his religious view for the edification of others. 

But the word "propagation" only indicates persuasion and exposition without any element of coercion. 

Conversion - 

Case -Rev. Stainislaus vs State of M.P., 1977 SC 

Held - There is no fundamental right to convert another person to one's own religion because if a person purposely undertakes the conversion of another person to his religion as distinguished from  his effort to transmit or spread the tenets of his religion that would impinge on the "freedom of conscience", guaranteed to all the citizens of the country alike.

No compulsion to sing National Anthem 

Case- Bijoe Emmanuel 🆚 State of Kerala, 1986 SC

Children of Jehova's witnesses of Christian community stood respectfully but refused to sing National Anthem as according to them it was against the tenets of their religious faith which did not permit them to join in any ritual except if it be in their prayer to Jehova, their God. They were expelled from school. They challenged the validity of their expulsion on the ground that fundamental right under 25(1).

The Kerala High Court held that it was fundamental duty to sing the National Anthem. 

Held- SC reversed the High Court decision. 8t held- No person can be compelled to sing the National Anthem "if he has genuine, conscientious religious objection." There is no legal obligation in India for a citizen to sing the National Anthem.

Appointment of non-Brahmins as Pujari in temple - 

Case- N. Aditya 🆚 Travancore Dewaswon Board

Held- Brahmins don't have monopoly over performing puja in a temple. A non-Brahmin can be appointed as a Pujari if he is properly trained and well versed with rituals to be performed and mantras to be recited. 

Acquisition of place of worship 

Case- Ismail Faruqui 🆚 Union of India, 1994 SC

Held- State can in exercise of its sovereign power acquire places of worship like mosques, churches, temples etc. which is independent of Article 300A of the Constitution if it is necessary for maintenance of law and order. Such acquisition per se does not violate Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution. "Mosque is not essential part of practice of religion of Islam and namaz (prayer) by Muslims can be offered anywhere, even in open". 

Noise Pollution in the name if Religion in not allowed 

Case- Church of God (Full Gospel) in India 🆚 KKRMC Welfare Association, 2000 SC

Held - In the exercise of the right to religious freedom under Articles 25 and 26, no person can be allowed to create noise pollution or disturb the peace of others. The custom of religious prayer through the use of loudspeaker is not an essential element of any religion. 

Restrictions on Freedom of Religion 

Religious liberty is subject to-

• Public order;
• Morality; 
• Health;
• Any other provision of Part III of Indian Constitution 

Tandava dance in procession by Anandi Margis

Case- Acharya Jagdishwaranand Avadhuta 🆚 Commissioner of Police, Calcutta, 1984 SC

                                or

                 Anand Margi Case

An order under Section 144, CrPC did not ban procession or gatherings at public even by Anand Margis. It was prohibited carrying of daggers, trishuls and skulls which posed danger to public order and is also against morality. 

Held- Tandava dance in procession or at public places by Ananda Margis to carrying lethal weapons and human skills is not an essential religious rite of the followers of Ananda Marga and hence the order under Section 144, CrPC, prohibiting such procession in interest of 'public order' and 'morality' is not violative of the right of petitioners under Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution. 

Article 25(2)- Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law—

(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;

Forbidding Slaughter of Cow-

Case- Mohd. Hanif Qureshi 🆚 State of Bihar, 1958 SC

Held- The sacrifice of cow on the Bakrid day was not an essential part of Mohammadan religion and hence could by prohibited by State under Clause 2(a) of Article 25.

(b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.

Prohibition of Bigamy-

Case- State of Bombay 🆚 Varasu Bapamali, 1953 Bom

Held- An Act which prohibited bigamy was held valid under clause (2)(b), Polygamy is not an essential part of the Hindu religion. 

Prohibition of Sati or Devadasi

Case- Saifuddin Saheb 🆚 State of Bombay, 1962 SC

Held- Prohibition of civil practices such as Sati or system of Devadasi have been there held to be justified under this clause. 

Explanation I—The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion.

Explanation II—In sub-clause (b) of clause (2), the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly. 

                                     - Anjali Singh & 

                                       Deepak Kumar 

                            (University of Allahabad)