Freedom of religion

Also called: Right to freedom of religion, Articles 25-28 · Topic: Fundamental Rights and Constitutional Remedies · NCERT: Class 9, Ch 6 "Democracy"; Class 10, Ch 3 "Gender, Religion and Caste"; Class 11, Ch 8 "Secularism"; Class 11, Ch 2 "Rights in the Indian Constitution"

Meaning

Freedom of religion is the group of fundamental rights in Articles 25-28 that protect four things:

• each person's freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practise and propagate religion (Art. 25);
• a religious denomination's right to manage its own religious affairs (Art. 26);
• freedom from being forced to pay taxes that promote a religion (Art. 27);
• freedom from religious instruction in certain educational institutions (Art. 28).

All four are subject to public order, morality and health. Art. 25 is also subject to the other provisions of Part III and to the State's power to regulate and reform.

These articles put the Preamble's word "secular" (added by the 42nd Amendment, 1976) into practice. The State has no religion of its own. It must protect every faith equally, but it can still reform harmful social customs.

Explanation

Article 25 — the individual's right

• Text: "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].
• Who has it: "all persons", so both citizens and foreigners.
• Freedom of conscience: the inner freedom to hold any belief. This includes believing in no religion (atheism).
• Three outward rights:
• Profess: openly declare your faith.
• Practise: perform rituals, worship and observances.

• Propagate: spread your beliefs by explaining them to others. This does not include a right to convert another person.

• Two kinds of limits:

• Public order, morality and health.

• The other provisions of Part III. For example, a religious practice cannot override Art. 17 (abolition of untouchability).

• The State's power to regulate and reform (Art. 25(2)):

• 25(2)(a): the State may regulate any economic, financial, political or other secular (non-religious) activity linked to religion. An example is managing temple money and land.
• 25(2)(b): the State may provide for social welfare and reform. It may also throw open Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus. This is the temple-entry clause.

• Reform laws upheld under this power: bans on sati, bigamy (having two spouses at once) and human sacrifice, and opening temples to all castes.

• Two Explanations:

• Explanation I: wearing and carrying the kirpan (Sikh dagger) is part of the Sikh religion and is protected.
• Explanation II: in Art. 25(2)(b), "Hindus" includes Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists.

Article 26 — the group's right

• Text: subject to public order, morality and health, every religious denomination or any section of it has four rights [3]:
• (a) to set up 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;

• (d) to administer that property in accordance with law.

• Religious denomination: a group with three features. It has a common faith, a common organisation and a distinct name (Shirur Mutt, 1954).

• Group right, not individual right: Art. 26 is limited only by public order, morality and health. It is not made subject to "other provisions of this Part".

• Even so: a denomination's right under Art. 26(b) gives way to Art. 25(2)(b) (temple entry) (Sri Venkataramana Devaru, 1958).

• Essential religious practices test: courts protect only practices that are essential (core) to a religion, not every custom or superstition.

Articles 27 and 28 — keeping the State neutral

• Art. 27: no person shall be compelled to pay any taxes whose proceeds are specifically appropriated (set aside) to promote or maintain any particular religion or religious denomination [4].
• What it bars: the State using tax money to favour one religion.

• What it allows: a fee (a charge for a specific service, such as temple upkeep or pilgrim services). A fee pays for a service. It is not a tax that promotes a religion.

• Art. 28: whether religious instruction or worship may take place in an educational institution depends on who runs or funds it [5]:

Type of institution	Rule on religious instruction
Wholly maintained out of State funds (Art. 28(1))	No religious instruction at all
Run by the State but set up under an endowment or trust that requires religious instruction (Art. 28(2))	Allowed. This is the exception to Art. 28(1)
Recognised by the State or receiving State aid (Art. 28(3))	Allowed, but no one can be forced to attend without their consent (a guardian's consent for a minor)
Private, unaided and unrecognised	Not covered by Art. 28

In the Constitution and practice

• Where it sits: Part III, Arts. 25-28, under the heading "Right to Freedom of Religion". The Preamble's "secular" (42nd Amendment, 1976) is the idea behind these articles. India has no official religion and no religious test for holding public office.
• Who is a religious denomination:
• Commissioner, HRE v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt (1954): set the denomination test. It also held that the religion itself decides what is essential to it.

• S.P. Mittal v. Union of India (1983): the Auroville / Sri Aurobindo Society is not a religious denomination. It follows a philosophy, not a religion.

• The essential religious practices test over time:

• Durgah Committee, Ajmer v. Syed Hussain Ali (1961): courts will decide what is essential. Superstitious or merely secular parts of a religion get no protection.
• Ismail Faruqui v. Union of India (1994): offering namaz in a mosque is not an essential practice, unless that mosque has special significance. So the State may acquire mosque land.
• Indian Young Lawyers Association (2018): in a 4:1 ruling, the Court ended the ban on women aged 10-50 entering the Sabarimala temple.
• Kantaru Rajeevaru (10 February 2020): a nine-judge bench agreed to hear wider questions on religious freedom and on how far courts may review essential practices [12].
• Nine-judge bench hearings: arguments were heard in April-May 2026, and the judgment is awaited (verify current) [13].

• Aishat Shifa v. State of Karnataka (2022): the two judges split 1:1 on the classroom hijab ban, so the case went to a larger bench.

• Propagation and conversion:

• Rev. Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977): a five-judge bench upheld the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967 and the MP Dharma Swatantrya Adhiniyam, 1968. Both Acts ban conversion by force, fraud or inducement.

• Reasoning: forcing a conversion harms the other person's freedom of conscience. It also threatens public order, so states may make such laws.

• Anti-conversion laws ("Freedom of Religion Acts"): state laws that ban conversion by force, fraud, allurement (a bribe or gift) or undue influence.

• States with these laws: Odisha (1967), MP (1968), Arunachal Pradesh (1978), Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand (2018), Uttar Pradesh (2021), MP (2021), Karnataka (2022), Haryana (2022) and others [9][10][11].
• Uttarakhand Act, 2018: the convert must tell the District Magistrate one month in advance [10].
• UP Act, 2021: conversion "by promise of marriage" is unlawful. A Family Court can declare void a marriage done only for unlawful conversion [11].
• Karnataka Act, 2022: both the convert and the person conducting the conversion must give 30 days' notice to the DM or ADM [9].
• Rajasthan Bill, 2025 (introduced in February 2025) [6]:
  • Prison terms run from 1-5 years for ordinary cases to 3-10 years for mass conversion.
  • The burden of proof is on the person who caused the conversion. That person must prove the conversion was lawful.
  • Going back to one's immediately previous religion is exempt.

• Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Bill, 2026: requires 60 days' prior notice from both the convert and the organiser [7]. It was enacted as Act No. 47 of 2026 [8].

• Religious instruction: Aruna Roy v. Union of India (2002) upheld the NCFSE 2000 curriculum. The Court held that studying the values and philosophy of different religions is not "religious instruction" under Art. 28.

Don't confuse with

• Cultural and educational rights (Arts. 29-30): these protect language, script and culture, and the right of minorities to run schools and colleges. Arts. 25-28 protect faith and worship. Art. 25 covers "all persons", but Arts. 29-30 cover only "citizens" or "minorities".
• Art. 25 vs Art. 26: Art. 25 is an individual right and is subject to the other provisions of Part III. Art. 26 is a group (denomination) right and is subject only to public order, morality and health. Even so, Art. 26(b) gives way to Art. 25(2)(b).
• Right to propagate vs right to convert: propagation means spreading your beliefs by explaining them. It does not include converting another person (Rev. Stainislaus, 1977).
• Tax vs fee (Art. 27): a tax whose proceeds are set aside to promote a religion is barred. A fee for a specific service, such as pilgrim facilities, is allowed. NCERT's wording "freedom to pay taxes" is wrong. The right is freedom from being forced to pay such taxes.

Prelims Hooks

• Art. 25 covers "all persons", so foreigners also have it. Explanation I protects the kirpan. Explanation II says "Hindus" in Art. 25(2)(b) includes Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists.
• Art. 25(2)(b) lets the State open Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus. Sri Venkataramana Devaru (1958) held that this prevails over a denomination's right under Art. 26(b).
• Case and principle pairs:
• Shirur Mutt (1954): test for a religious denomination.
• S.P. Mittal (1983): Auroville is not a denomination.
• Rev. Stainislaus (1977): no right to convert.
• Ismail Faruqui (1994): namaz in a mosque is not an essential practice.

• Aruna Roy (2002): studying religions is not religious instruction.

• Art. 28 trap: religious instruction is banned only in institutions wholly maintained out of State funds. It is allowed in State-run institutions set up under a trust that requires it. It is optional, with consent, in aided or recognised institutions.

• Art. 27 bars taxes spent on promoting a religion, but fees are allowed.
• Sabarimala reference: sent to a nine-judge bench on 10 February 2020 [12]. Hearings were held in April-May 2026 [13].

Mains Points

• Freedom to convert vs protection from coercion:
• Rev. Stainislaus (1977) let states ban forced conversion to protect conscience and public order.
• Newer Acts go further. They require 30-60 days' prior notice, make "conversion marriages" void and reverse the burden of proof [6][7][9][11].

• Critics say this hurts privacy (K.S. Puttaswamy, 2017) and an adult's choice of faith and partner (Shafin Jahan, 2018, Hadiya case). Supporters point to fraud and public order. Challenges are pending in the Supreme Court (verify current).

• Who decides what is "essential" to a religion?

• The test has moved from "the religion decides" (Shirur Mutt, 1954) to "the court decides" (Durgah Committee, 1961 → Ismail Faruqui, 1994 → Sabarimala, 2018). Judges now end up deciding questions of theology.

• The nine-judge reference [12][13] could shift the test towards constitutional morality, or leave more of these decisions to each community.

• Secularism with reform: India's model does not fully separate religion and State. Art. 25(2) lets the State reform harmful customs such as sati, untouchability and caste-based temple exclusion. Art. 27 and Art. 28(1) stop the State from favouring any faith. The open question is where reform ends and interference with religious autonomy begins.

Related concepts

• Freedom of conscience
• Right to propagate religion
• Rev. Stainislaus case
• Anti-conversion laws
• State regulation of religious practice
• Freedom to manage religious affairs
• Religious denomination
• Freedom from taxes for promotion of religion
• Freedom as to religious instruction
• Cultural and educational rights

Read more

• Freedom of religion and the rights of minorities: Articles 25-30