Right to Freedom of Religion: Key Articles & Landmark Cases

The Right to Freedom of Religion is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. It ensures that every individual has the liberty to follow, practice, and propagate the faith of their choice. This right is the foundation for harmony and coexistence in a diverse country like India, home to multiple religions, cultures, and traditions.

India is a secular democracy, meaning the State does not favor one religion but treats all religions equally. This principle safeguards individual dignity while preventing discrimination based on faith. The Right to Freedom of Religion is enshrined under Articles 25 to 28 of the Indian Constitution, which collectively guarantee freedom of conscience, free profession, practice, and propagation of religion, along with provisions related to religious institutions, education, and taxes for spiritual purposes.

In today’s context, where religious tolerance and inclusivity remain crucial for social unity, this right is vital in protecting India’s secular ethos and promoting peaceful coexistence among its citizens.

Constitutional Basis of Religious Freedom

The Right to Freedom of Religion is rooted in Part III of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees Fundamental Rights to protect personal liberty and dignity. Articles 25 to 28 specifically safeguard religious freedom, allowing individuals to freely profess, practice, and propagate their faith while ensuring public order, morality, and health.

This right is closely linked to the principle of secularism in the Preamble. By declaring India a secular republic, the Constitution ensures that the State remains neutral toward all religions, preventing majoritarian dominance and protecting minority rights.

The applicability of this right varies: Article 25 extends to all persons, including non-citizens, whereas Articles 26–28, dealing with religious institutions, education, and taxation, broadly apply to citizens and organized religious denominations.

Articles 25 to 28 Explained

Articles 25 to 28 of the Indian Constitution comprehensively safeguard the Right to Freedom of Religion, covering individual faith, religious institutions, education, and taxation. These provisions protect religious liberty while maintaining public order, morality, and the State’s secular character.

Article 25 – Freedom of Conscience & Free Profession, Practice, Propagation

Article 25 guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion. This means that every person in India, regardless of faith, is free to hold personal beliefs, follow religious practices, and share their religion with others. It reflects India’s secular and pluralistic ethos, where faith is an individual choice.

The scope of Article 25 is broad but not absolute. The Constitution imposes certain restrictions in the interests of public order, morality, health, and other Fundamental Rights. For instance, the State can regulate harmful practices such as human or animal sacrifice, untouchability, or practices that harm public order.

Case laws:

• Rev. Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977): The Supreme Court held that the right to “propagate” religion does not mean the right to convert others forcibly. Propagation means spreading information or explaining the principles of one’s faith.
• Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala (1986): In this case, three students belonging to Jehovah’s Witnesses were expelled for refusing to sing the national anthem due to their religious beliefs. The Supreme Court upheld their right, ruling that forcing them to sing would violate their freedom of conscience under Article 25.

Thus, Article 25 ensures a delicate balance between personal religious freedom and broader societal interests. It protects genuine faith practices while empowering the State to regulate harmful or coercive religious activities.

Article 26 – Freedom to Manage Religious Affairs

Article 26 grants religious denominations or sections of a denomination the right to manage their own affairs in matters of religion. This includes the rights to establish and maintain institutions, manage property, and decide rituals and practices according to their faith.

However, like Article 25, these rights are subject to public order, morality, and health. The State cannot interfere in purely religious matters, but it can regulate secular activities associated with religion. For example, while the rituals inside a temple are protected, the administration of temple finances can be controlled by law.

Case law:

• The Shirur Mutt Case (Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments v. Shri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar, 1954): The Supreme Court distinguished between religious and secular matters. It held that while the State cannot interfere in essential religious practices, it can regulate secular administration, such as property management or misuse of funds.

In essence, Article 26 empowers religious communities with autonomy while ensuring accountability in their secular dealings.

Article 27 – Freedom from Paying Taxes for Religion

Article 27 protects individuals from being compelled to pay taxes whose proceeds are specifically used to promote or maintain any particular religion or religious denomination. This provision upholds the principle of secularism by ensuring that the State does not force citizens to fund religious activities through taxation.

However, it does not prevent the State from imposing general taxes that may indirectly benefit religious institutions. For example, suppose the government maintains public roads that lead to a temple or provides electricity subsidies to all institutions (including religious ones). In that case, this is not considered a violation of Article 27.

Case references:

• In Prafull Goradia v. Union of India (2011), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of subsidies for Hajj pilgrims, ruling that such expenditure was not drawn from a tax meant explicitly for religious purposes but was part of a welfare scheme.

Thus, Article 27 ensures that taxpayers are not forced to directly fund religion, while allowing the State to spend public money for broader welfare programs that may include religious communities.

Article 28 – Religious Instruction in Institutions

Article 28 deals with religious instruction in educational institutions, striking a balance between secularism and freedom of choice. It makes the following distinctions:

1. State-maintained institutions (wholly funded by the State) cannot provide religious instruction, ensuring that government institutions remain strictly secular.
2. Institutions administered by the State but established under endowments or trusts may provide religious instruction, but only according to the conditions of the endowment.
3. Private and State-aided institutions can impart religious education, but no student can be compelled to participate without consent (or that of their guardian in case of minors).

Case reference:

• In Aruna Roy v. Union of India (2002), the Supreme Court clarified that teaching about all religions as part of a broader curriculum on moral values and culture does not violate Article 28, as long as it is not religious instruction or indoctrination.

Therefore, Article 28 ensures neutrality in State institutions while respecting the autonomy of private or religious institutions, safeguarding both secularism and choice.

Limitations & Reasonable Restrictions

While the Right to Freedom of Religion is fundamental but not absolute, the Constitution allows for reasonable restrictions to ensure that individual religious freedom does not compromise public welfare or other constitutional rights.

Grounds for Restrictions:

Religious practices can be regulated in the interests of public order, morality, and health. Practices that threaten peace, cause social unrest, or endanger lives may be curtailed. For example, harmful rituals, human or animal sacrifices, and practices promoting discrimination can be legally restricted.

Conflict with Other Fundamental Rights:

Religious freedom can sometimes clash with other Fundamental Rights, such as equality (Article 14), freedom of expression (Article 19), and women’s rights (Articles 15 & 21). In such situations, courts balance competing rights to protect constitutional values.

Illustrative Cases:

• Sabarimala Case (2018): Women of menstruating age were traditionally barred from entering the temple. The Supreme Court allowed women entry, ruling that religious practices cannot override women’s right to equality and dignity.
• Hijab Ban Case (2022): The Karnataka High Court upheld restrictions on wearing hijabs in schools, ruling that it was not an “essential religious practice” and that uniformity in public institutions justified the limitation.

The Constitution, therefore, maintains a delicate balance, safeguarding religious liberty while ensuring public welfare, equality, and secular principles. These restrictions reinforce that religion is a matter of personal conscience, not a justification for practices that harm society or violate fundamental rights.

Landmark Judgments

The Indian judiciary has played a crucial role in interpreting and defining the scope of the Right to Freedom of Religion. Over the years, several landmark cases have clarified the balance between individual religious liberty and societal interests.

Shirur Mutt Case (1954)

• Facts: The State sought to regulate the management of a Hindu religious institution, the Shirur Mutt, including property and administration.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court distinguished between religious and secular matters, holding that while essential religious practices cannot be interfered with, secular administration of property and finances can be regulated.
• Significance: Established the principle that Article 26 protects religious practices but allows state regulation of secular aspects, balancing autonomy and accountability.

Rev. Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977)

• Facts: Christian missionaries were accused of forcibly converting individuals to Christianity.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court held that the right to propagate religion under Article 25 does not include the right to coerce or induce conversion; propagation must be peaceful and voluntary.
• Significance: Clarified the limits of religious propagation, reinforcing the protection of personal choice and public order.

Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala (1986)

• Facts: Three Jehovah’s Witness students refused to sing the national anthem in school due to religious beliefs and were expelled.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled that their expulsion violated Article 25, protecting freedom of conscience and religious practice.
• Significance: Strengthened the principle that religious beliefs must be respected even in public institutions, affirming individual liberty over uniform mandates.

Sabarimala Case (Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, 2018)

• Facts: Women of menstruating age were traditionally barred from entering the Sabarimala temple.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court allowed women of all ages to enter, stating that religious practices cannot violate fundamental rights such as equality (Article 14) and dignity.
• Significance: Demonstrated the judiciary’s role in reconciling religious freedom with gender equality, emphasizing constitutional morality over tradition.

Hijab Ban Case (Aishat Shifa v. State of Karnataka, 2022)

• Facts: Students challenged restrictions on wearing hijabs in educational institutions.
• Ruling: The Karnataka High Court upheld the ban, ruling that wearing a hijab was not an “essential religious practice” and school uniformity justified the restriction.
• Significance: Highlighted tensions between religious expression and secular uniformity, illustrating limits on freedom of religion in public institutions.

Recent Developments & Contemporary Issues

In recent years, the Right to Freedom of Religion has been central to several legal and social debates in India. One primary focus is religious conversion laws. Several states have enacted “anti-conversion” laws requiring individuals to notify authorities before converting, aiming to prevent coercion or fraud. However, these laws have raised concerns about limiting genuine personal choice and potentially violating Article 25.

Another key issue is the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) debate, which proposes a standard set of personal laws for all citizens. Advocates argue that a UCC would promote equality and gender justice. At the same time, opponents caution that it may interfere with religious freedom and cultural diversity, especially in marriage, inheritance, and adoption matters.

The judiciary plays a vital role in balancing religious liberty with other rights. Recent Supreme Court and High Court rulings, such as those on religious attire in schools and temple entry, reflect the tension between personal faith, equality, and secular principles.

Comparative Perspective

The Right to Freedom of Religion in India can be better understood by comparing it with provisions in other democratic nations. In the United States, the First Amendment guarantees freedom of religion, prohibiting Congress from establishing a religion or restricting religious exercise. Similarly, the United Kingdom upholds freedom of religion under common law and human rights legislation, though it recognizes the Church of England as the state religion.

India’s approach, however, is unique in balancing religion and secularism. Unlike the US or UK, India’s Constitution explicitly enshrines the freedom of religion and the principle of secularism in the Preamble and Fundamental Rights. Articles 25–28 protect individual religious liberty and regulate religious institutions, taxation, and education, ensuring that personal faith does not override public interest, equality, or social reform.

This model allows India to accommodate its pluralistic society, where multiple religions coexist, while maintaining state neutrality and safeguarding citizens’ rights. The Indian framework demonstrates a nuanced attempt to harmonize individual freedom, social justice, and secular governance, making it a distinctive example in the global context.

Difference Between Indian Secularism and Western Secularism

Importance of Right to Freedom of Religion

The Right to Freedom of Religion is a cornerstone of India’s democracy. It ensures that everyone can follow and practice their faith freely. It is vital in promoting social harmony, equality, and the nation’s pluralistic character.

Promotes Unity in Diversity

The Right to Freedom of Religion is fundamental to maintaining India’s unity in diversity. With a population adhering to multiple faiths, cultures, and traditions, this right ensures that every individual can practice their religion freely, fostering mutual respect and social harmony. It prevents majoritarian dominance and allows diverse communities to coexist peacefully, strengthening the nation’s social fabric.

Protects Minority Communities

This right is crucial for protecting minorities. By guaranteeing freedom of conscience and religious practice, Articles 25–28 empower minority communities to preserve their traditions, institutions, and beliefs without fear of discrimination or interference. Such protections promote inclusivity and prevent marginalization in a democratic setup.

Upholds Secular Democracy

In a secular democracy like India, the right ensures that the State remains neutral toward all religions. It prevents government favoritism, supports equal treatment of all faiths, and upholds the constitutional ideal that religion should be a matter of personal choice, not state control. Moreover, by balancing individual liberty with public interest, this right promotes social justice, equality, and respect for human dignity.

Cornerstone of Pluralistic Society

The Right to Freedom of Religion is a constitutional guarantee and cornerstone of India’s pluralistic democracy. It enables peaceful coexistence, equality, and national unity.

Conclusion

The Right to Freedom of Religion, enshrined in Articles 25–28 of the Indian Constitution, guarantees individuals the freedom to follow, practice, and propagate their faith, while regulating the management of religious institutions, taxation for religious purposes, and religious instruction in educational institutions. These provisions protect personal liberty, ensure minority rights, and preserve India’s diverse cultural heritage.

At the same time, the Constitution allows reasonable restrictions in the interests of public order, morality, health, and other Fundamental Rights. Landmark judgments like Shirur Mutt, Rev. Stanislaus, Bijoe Emmanuel, Sabarimala, and recent hijab cases illustrate the careful balance between individual religious freedom and societal welfare.

Ultimately, this right is central to India’s secular democracy, ensuring that religion remains a matter of personal conscience while the State maintains neutrality. Harmonizing freedom with responsibility strengthens social cohesion, protects minorities, and upholds the nation’s pluralistic and inclusive ethos.

Read More :-

• Dowry Prohibition Act of 1961: Insights & Overview
• The Right Against Exploitation: Articles 23 and 24
• Preamble of Indian Constitution | A Brief Overview
• Constituent Assembly of India: An Overview

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)