Dr.

Priyanka Mohod
 Synopsis
• Articles 25 to 28
• Article 25- Freedom of Religion
• Article 26- Freedom to manage
• Artcile27- Freedom from taxes
• Article 28- Prohibition of Religious instructions
• India is a Secular State- 42nd Amendment Act,
1976 has inserted the word Secular.
• Secularism is neither anti God nor pro-God.
• S.R. Bommai V. Union of India- Secularism is
the basic feature of the Constitution. Religion
is matter of individual faith and can not be
mixed with secular activities.
• Secularism – Developing, understanding and
respect for different religion-
• Aruna Roy V. Union of India- Developing,
understanding and respect for different religion.
The validity of the new National Education
Policy, 2002 which provided for value based
education to school children based on basis of
all religion in school education is not against the
secular philosophy of the Constitution.
 Article 25
• Freedom of conscience and free profession,
practice and propagation of religion
• (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
• (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;
• (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
• What is religion?- Religion is matter of faith
with individual and communities.
• Prescribes rituals, ceremonies, mode of
worship which are regarded integral part of
religion.
• Freedom of Conscience
• Freedom to profess, practice and
propagate religion
• National Anthem Case- No person can be
compelled to sing the National Anthem if he has
genuine conscientious religious objection.
• Ramesh V. Union of India- The Court while
dismissing the petition held that there is no
violation of Article 25 and the respondent has not
acted improperly. It further held that when the
serial is viewed in its entirety it creates an
impression of peace and co-existence and that
the people are not likely to be carried away by the
violence shown in it.
• N. Aditya V. Travancore Devaswom Board- Brahmins do
not have monopoly over performing puja in a temple
and said that a non Brahmin can be appointed over as a
pujary if he properly qualified and trained to perform
the puja in an appropriate manner. Such a person can be
appointed as ‘Santhikaran’ despite his caste.
• M Siddiq V. Mahant Suresh Das- Supreme Court held
that the State has the sovereign power to acquire the
property. The state also has the power to acquire places
of worship such as mosque, church, temple, etc and the
acquisition of places of worship per se is not violative
of Articles 25 and 26.
• Moulana Mufti V. State of W.B- The court
held that, the restrictions imposed by the
state on the use of the microphones and
loudspeakers at the time of Azan is not
violative or right under Art. 25 of the
Constitution of India.
• Noise Pollution – Church of God Full Gospel
in India V. K.K.R.M.C.- The court held that, in
the exercise of the right to religious freedom
under Arts. 25 and 26 no person can be
allowed to create noise pollution or disturb
the peace of others.
Restrictions on Freedom of Religion

Regulation of
Subject to Public
Economic, Financial, Social Welfare and
Order, Morality and
political and secular Social Reforms
Health
activities
• 1. Religious Liberty subject to Public order,
Morality and Health- In the name of religion
untouchability and traffic in human beings,
system of Devadasis can not be tolerated.
• Acharya Avadhuta V. Commissioner of Police,
Calcutta- The court held that the Tandava Dance in
procession at public places by Ananda Margas
carrying lethal weapons and human skulls was
not an essential religious rite of the followers of
the Anand Marga.
• 2. Regulation of economic, financial, political
and secular activities associated with
religious practices-
• Mohd. Hanif Quareshi V. State of Bihar- The
court held that, scarifies of cow on the Bakrid
day was not an essential part of
Mahammedan religion and hence could be
prohibited by state under clause (2) (a) of Art.
25.
 Article 26
• Freedom to manage religious affairs Subject to
public order, morality and health, every religious
denomination or any section thereof shall have the
right
• (a) to establish and maintain institutions for
religious and charitable purposes;
• (b) to manage its own affairs in matters of religion;
• (c) to own and acquire movable and immovable
property; and
• (d) to administer such property in accordance with
law
• The right guaranteed under Art. 26 is the right
of an organized body.
• 1. Right to establish and maintain institutions
for charitable and religious purposes
• 2. Right to manage matters of Religion- The
state cannot interfere in the exercise of this
unless they run counter to public order.
• 3. Right to administered property owned by
denomination- Clauses (c) and (d).-
• Durgah Committee Ajmer V. Syed Hussain
Ali - the Supreme Court observed that if the
religious denomination never had the right to
administer property or if it has lost its right
then such right cannot be created under
Article 26 and therefore cannot be invoked.
 Article 27
• Freedom as to payment of taxes for
promotion of any particular religion - No
person shall be compelled to pay any taxes,
the proceeds of which are specifically
appropriated in payment of expenses for the
promotion or maintenance of any particular
religion or religions denomination.
• Prohibits Tax and not fee.
• Rati Lal V. State of Bombay- The tax is in the nature
of compulsory exaction of money by a public
authority for public purposes. The tax is a common
burden and the only return which the tax-prayer
gets is a participation in the common benefits of
the State. Fees are payments primarily in public
interest but for some special service rendered or
some special work done for the benefit of those
from whom the payments are demanded.
 Article 28

• Freedom as to attendance at religious instruction or religious

worship in certain educational institutions
• (1) No religion instruction shall be provided in any educational
institution wholly maintained out of State funds
• (2) Nothing in clause ( 1 ) shall apply to an educational institution
which is administered by the State but has been established
under any endowment or trust which requires that religious
instruction shall be imparted in such institution
• (3) No person attending any educational institution recognized
by the State or receiving aid out of State funds shall be required
to take part in any religious instruction that may be imparted in
such institution or to attend any religious worship that may be
conducted in such institution or in any premises attached thereto
unless such person or, if such person is a minor, his guardian has
given his consent thereto Cultural and Educational Rights
Religious Instructions in Institutions

Wholly
maintained
by the State

Administered by state
but are established
Art. Recognized
28 by the State
under trust or
endowment

Receiving aid
out of state
fund
• D.A.V. College Jullundhar V. State of Punjab- The court
held that, Section 4 of the Guru Nanak University Act,
which enjoined the university to encourage an
academic study of life and teaching of Guru Nanak does
not amount to religious instructions or promotions of
any particular religion and therefore it is
Constitutionally valid.
• Aruna Roy V. Union of India- The court said that, the
contention of petitioner that knowledge of different
religions would bring disharmony in the society is
totally wrong.