Right to Freedom of Religion: What It Means and Why It Matters?

The right to freedom of religion is a fundamental human right that is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 25 of the Indian Constitution provides for freedom of conscience, and free profession, practise, and propagation of Religion. This right protects the freedom of individuals to believe or not believe in any religion, and to practice their religion without fear of persecution. The purpose of explaining the right to freedom of religion is to make you aware of the basic religious rights. 

Explain the right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Indian Constitution and its meaning?

The right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Indian constitution means that all citizens of India have the right to freely practice and propagate their religion. This right is subject to public order, morality, and health. The right to freedom of religion is a fundamental right that is enshrined under the Indian Constitution. Further, it says that the state has no religion of its own and shall not discriminate between subjects based on religion.

What are the religious activities permitted under the Indian Constitution?

Article 25 not only provides for the right to practise freely and propagate their religion but it also provides for practicing Customs and Usages. It also allows any person to follow any ritual associated with that religion but it is subject to public order, morality, and health. Supreme Court in the case of The State of Rajasthan v. Tilkayat Shri Govindlalji Maharaj held that test to determine that what shall be an essential part of religion shall be decided by the fact that whether it is considered as an important part of religion by the religious community.

Judicial pronouncement on the Right to freedom of Religion

Mansoor Ali v. Hasan Ali: The Bombay High Court, in this case, held that Article 25 not only protects doctrines or beliefs of religion but also tries to protect any act done in pursuance of religion. Therefore, it guarantees ceremonies, modes of worship, rituals, etc.

Bijoy Emanuel v. State of Kerala (The National Anthem Case): Three students of a school in Kerala belonged to a particular sect called Jehovah’s and they worshipped only Jehova. These students refused to sing the national anthem by saying that it was against their religious practice and belief but they used to stand while the National Anthem was going on and show no disrespect to it. Consequently, the students were expelled from the school. Supreme Court held that the action of the headmistress to expel those students violated the right of freedom of religion. Therefore, the fundamental rights enshrined under Articles 19 (1) (a) and 25 were violated. It was further held that no law obligates or compels anyone to sing the national anthem, it shall be not regarded as disrespect if a person stands and does not sing the national anthem.

Ramesh V. Union of India ( Telecast of Serial Case): A case was filed in the Supreme Court. to stop the telecast of serial ‘Tamas’ based on the ground that it was promoting communal violence and violated Articles 21 and 25. The four episodes of that serial were already telecasted. Supreme Court in this case held that it was not violative of Articles 21 and 25 as it was portraying historical facts. Supreme Court said that the purpose of explaining the right to freedom of religion is to promote communal harmony.

Shayara Bano v. Union of India ( Triple Talaq case): Talaq-e-Biddat or triple talaq was a kind of divorce through which a Muslim man could give divorce to her wife by just saying Talaq three times. Five judges of the constitution bench of the Supreme Court heard the petition. The Supreme Court held that talaq-e-bidat is illegal and unconstitutional.

Church of God (Full Gospel) v. K.K.R Majestic Colony welfare association: Supreme Court in this case, held that nowhere in religion it is mentioned in religious texts that while doing prayers drums or voice amplifiers should be used. If there is any such practice then it should be done without hurting or affecting others.

Similarly, in another case, Maulana Mufti v. State of West Bengal the Calcutta High Court held that the Azzan is a vital part of religion but the use of loudspeakers is not.

Conclusion

The right to freedom of religion is a fundamental human right that should be defended and protected. It matters because it allows people to believe in whatever they choose, without fear of retribution or discrimination. It also allows for religious expression and the practice of one’s faith. For anyone, this means having access to religious education and being able to pray or worship freely. Further, it tries to prohibit any ill-practice in the name of religious ceremony or activity. This has been made a fundamental right for every citizen of India, thereby making it at par with Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We must work together to protect this fundamental human right so that all people can live with dignity and respect.