What is Article 25 of the Constitution of India?
Historical Background
Key Points
12 points- 1.
The core guarantee of Article 25(1) is that all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice and propagate religion. This means the state cannot discriminate against any person based on their religion. For example, a law cannot say that Hindus can build temples but Muslims cannot build mosques.
- 2.
The phrase 'freedom of conscience' is crucial. It protects an individual's inner belief system, even if they don't outwardly practice a religion. So, an atheist or agnostic is equally protected under Article 25 as a devout believer.
- 3.
The right to 'profess' religion means openly declaring one's faith. The right to 'practice' religion includes performing religious rituals and ceremonies. The right to 'propagate' religion means sharing one's religious beliefs with others, but it does not include the right to forcibly convert someone.
- 4.
Article 25(2)(a) allows the State to regulate or restrict any economic, financial, political, or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice. For instance, the government can regulate the management of temple funds to prevent corruption, even though managing a temple is a religious activity.
- 5.
Article 25(2)(b) states that the State can make laws 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. This provision was used to justify laws allowing Dalits to enter Hindu temples, challenging the caste-based exclusion that was historically practiced.
- 6.
A key limitation on religious freedom is that it is subject to 'public order, morality and health'. This means the government can restrict religious practices that threaten public safety, violate moral standards, or endanger public health. For example, animal sacrifice can be restricted if it is deemed cruel or poses a health risk.
- 7.
The 'essential religious practices' doctrine is a controversial aspect of interpreting Article 25. The Supreme Court has used this doctrine to determine whether a particular practice is essential to a religion. If it is, the state generally cannot interfere with it. If it is not, the state can regulate it. This has led to debates about who decides what is 'essential' to a religion.
- 8.
The Sabarimala case highlighted the tension between religious freedom and gender equality under Article 25. The Supreme Court had to decide whether the ban on women of menstruating age entering the Sabarimala temple was an essential religious practice. The court ultimately ruled that it was not and that the ban violated women's fundamental rights.
- 9.
The 'anti-exclusion test', proposed by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, offers an alternative approach to the 'essential religious practices' doctrine. This test focuses on whether a religious practice excludes individuals in a way that impairs their dignity or violates constitutional principles. If it does, the practice is not protected under Article 25.
- 10.
Article 26, which guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs in matters of religion, is often read in conjunction with Article 25. However, Article 26 applies to religious groups, while Article 25 applies to individuals. This means that a religious group's right to manage its affairs is also subject to public order, morality, and health.
- 11.
The right to propagate religion under Article 25 does not include the right to convert people through force, fraud, or inducement. Several states have enacted anti-conversion laws that aim to prevent forced conversions, but these laws have been challenged on the grounds that they violate Article 25.
- 12.
The wearing of religious symbols, such as turbans by Sikhs or hijabs by Muslim women, is generally protected under Article 25 as part of the practice of religion. However, this right can be restricted if it interferes with public order or the functioning of institutions. The Karnataka hijab ban case raised complex questions about the balance between religious freedom and institutional discipline.
Visual Insights
Understanding Article 25
Key aspects of Article 25 and its relationship with other fundamental rights and legal concepts.
Article 25: Freedom of Religion
- ●Scope of Freedom
- ●Limitations & Restrictions
- ●Related Articles
- ●Landmark Cases
Evolution of Article 25 Jurisprudence
Key events and legal developments shaping the interpretation and application of Article 25.
Article 25 has been subject to continuous interpretation and re-evaluation by the courts, balancing religious freedom with other constitutional principles.
- 1950Constitution of India comes into force, enshrining Article 25
- 1954Shirur Mutt Case: Introduced the 'essential religious practices' doctrine
- 1966Sastri Yagnapurushadji case further elaborates on essential religious practices
- 2018Sabarimala Verdict: Challenges the scope of essential religious practices and gender equality
- 2022Karnataka Hijab Ban: Raises questions about religious freedom and institutional discipline
- 2023Supreme Court hears petitions challenging the Places of Worship Act
- 2025Nawang v. Bahadur clarifies Hindu Succession Act's applicability to Scheduled Tribes
- 2026Supreme Court reviews Sabarimala case and essential religious practices doctrine
Recent Developments
10 developmentsIn 2018, the Supreme Court's verdict in *Indian Young Lawyers Association vs. State of Kerala* (the Sabarimala case) sparked nationwide debate regarding the scope of religious freedom under Article 25 and its intersection with gender equality.
The Supreme Court is currently reviewing the 'essential religious practices' doctrine, which is often used to interpret Article 25, to determine its continued relevance and applicability in a secular society.
Several states have enacted or amended anti-conversion laws in recent years, raising concerns about their potential impact on the right to propagate religion under Article 25.
The Karnataka High Court's 2022 decision upholding the ban on hijabs in educational institutions raised questions about the extent to which religious freedom can be restricted in the name of institutional discipline and uniformity.
The ongoing debate surrounding the validity of certain religious practices, such as triple talaq and polygamy, continues to test the boundaries of religious freedom under Article 25 and its compatibility with constitutional values of equality and dignity.
In 2023, the Supreme Court heard petitions challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which some argue infringes upon the right to religious freedom under Article 25.
The issue of inheritance rights for tribal women, who are often excluded from property ownership under customary laws, continues to be debated in the context of Article 25 and the protection of cultural autonomy.
The increasing use of technology and social media has raised new challenges for regulating hate speech and protecting religious sentiments, requiring a re-evaluation of the limitations on freedom of expression under Article 25.
The government's efforts to promote religious tourism and pilgrimage sites have also sparked discussions about the role of the state in religious affairs and the potential for discrimination against minority religions under Article 25.
The upcoming nine-judge Bench hearings will impact not only the Sabarimala case but also other religious controversies, such as the Dawoodi Bohra community's rights and Parsi women's religious practices.
