Secularism and Religious Fanaticism.

8.0 Objectives
8.1. Introduction
8.2 Topic Explanation
8.2.1 Secularism
8.2.1.1 Concept of Secularism
8.2.1.2 Definition of Secularism
8.2.1.3 Universal acceptance of Secularism
8.2.2. Secularism under Indian Constitution
8.2.2.1 Preamble
8.2.2.2 Freedom of religion under Article 25
8.2.2.3 Restriction on the freedom of Religion
8.2.3 Right to religion
8.2.3.1 The universal declaration of Human Rights.
8.2.3.2 Civil and Political discrimination 1966
8.2.3.3 Declaration on religious discrimination 1981
8.2.4 Religious Fanaticism
8.2.4.1 Religious Fanatics
8.2.4.2 Religion and Terrorism
8.3. Questions for self learning
8.4. Let us sum up
8.5. Glossary
8.6. References / Bibliography.
 8.0. Objectives -
1. To enable pupil to understand the meaning and importance of secularism.
2. To enable pupil to understand the policy of founding members of the
Constitution with respect to secularism
3. To enable pupil to learn secular practices in India.
4. To enable pupil to understand the effect of religious intolerance and its
consequences.

8.1. Introduction -
India is a habitat for many religions. Since time immemorial people
from distance land came to India and made it their home, be it Aryans, the
Moguls and so on. They came as invaders and stayed back in India making it a
habitat for many religions. Religion is a social phenomenon, unique of its kind
and each has its own community. The character and right of religious
observance depends upon the membership of particular social group. This
gives rise to specific collective identity and basis for group cohesion.
Transformations within the religion occur in the course of social development
due to reformative movements, emergence of alternative faiths, rise of new
leadership, impact of other cultures and efforts of modification.
State is also as an initiator of modernization and enforcer of values of
human rights and welfare. It puts forward a distinct power center that indirectly
influences the patterns of religious life. By resolving inter-religious conflicts,
by ensuring communal harmony and by facilitating religious acts, state plays
crucial paternal role in the society. Since religions wield overwhelming
influence on the social and individual life in traditional societies as that of
India, and often over emphasize customary beliefs, thereby retarding or
hindering modernisation, the question of
bringing or concretizing social transformation with the help of law faces
practical difficulties.
Religious issues often become sites of social tension because of
competing religious sentiments. Society as a common hinterland for both
religion and state has to prepare itself for an orderly development by respecting
paramount human values. A principled distancing from all religions and an
approach of impartiality in treatment provide a safe walk, soberness and
legitimacy for state action. Being a component of the policy of
multiculturalism, this approach sets ways and limits to law’s regulative task,
and inculcates an attitude and mindset for co-existence amidst different
religious communities.
Basically religion is for spiritual guidance of the people and hence can
be a major resource for peace and social justice. It can become, as liberation
theology indicates, a powerful option for the weaker sections of society.
Instead religion has more often been used by powerful vested interests of
which religious functionaries become apart. Worse, religious functionaries and
priests themselves
create powerful establishments and join hands with politicians to protect their
establishments.
Secularism is one of the important national goals. Though secularism
has been an official Government policy, bulk of people in India still remain
non secular. Communalism and Terrorism are big threat to secularism. Search
for viable parameters for the appropriate triangular relations among state,
religion, and individual become an imperative in shaping the legal policies in
the task of social transformation. Hence it was felt that India be declared as
secular State.
 8.2 Topic Explanation
8.2.1 Secularism:
During the ancient period religion was a dominant factor in the human society.
Religion controlled the politics. Religious had control over politics. Pope
controlled all Christian countries and Sultan of Turkey had political control
over the Muslim rulers for a period. Then there was a struggle between the
authority of the pope and the power of the gradually politics had been liberated
from religion. At last politics emerged successful superior. Revolutions that
broke out in various parts of the world resulted in the formation democratic
and constitutional Governments in many countries. Some countries have
religion as base for their Government. For example Islam is the official
religion of Pakistan. Hinduism is an official religion of Nepal. Some countries
follow Christianity and Buddhism their official religions. Countries like India
follow secularism
It is necessary to have an idea of the nature and meaning of the term
‘secularism’. It is interesting to note that there is no agreed and precise meaning of
‘secularism’ in our country. Jawaharlal Nehru wrote in his autobiography... “no
word perhaps in any language is more to be interpreted in different ways by the
people as the word ‘religion’. That being the ‘secularism’ which is a concept
evolved in relation to religion can also not have the connotation for all”.

8.2.1.1 Concept of Secularism

The English word “secular is derived from the Latin word
SAECULUM”. Earlier in Monarchical countries secularists were described as
republicans. The French Revolution of 1789 popularised the idea of
secularism. The French constitution of 1791 introduced the idea of secular
state. Great Indians like, the Mughal king Akbar, social and religious
reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy and
Swamy Vivekananda respected the people of all religions. Particularly Indian
king Maharaja Ranjith Singh officially announced secularism as the policy of
his Government. He was successful in this regard. Ranjith Singh is considered
as a forerunner in implementing the idea of Secularism through Government
means. In the year 1888 the Indian National Congress opened a debate on
secularism and proposed secular nationalism for India. The idea of secularism
began in Indian politics in 1920 when Mahathma Gandhi organised Khilafat
movement in support of the Sultan of Turkey.

There are two possible models of secularism. In the first one, there is a
complete separation of religion and state to the extent that there is an
‘impassable wall’ between religion and secular spheres. In such a model, there
is no state intervention of religious matters and vice versa. In the other model,
all religions are to be treated equally by the state; other words, the state is equi-
distant from all religions. This model is also referred to as ‘non-discriminatory’
and is particularly relevant for multi-religious societies. In contrast to former
model, the latter allows for state intervention on grounds of public order and
social justice.
The Sanskrit phrase ‘Sarva Dharma Sambhava’ is the most appropriate Indian
vision secular state and society. But it should not be forgotten that the word
‘Secular’ has not been defined or explained under the constitution either in
1950 or in 1976 when it was made part of preamble.
Secularism as a modern political and constitutional principle involves
two basic propositions. The first is that people belonging to different faiths
and sects are equal before law, the constitution and the government policy. The
second requirement is that there can be no mixing up of religion and politics. It
follows that there can be no discrimination against any one on the basis of
religion or faith
nor is there room for the hegemony of one religion or religion of majority
sentiments and aspirations. It is in this double sense — no discrimination against
any one on grounds of faith and separation of religion from politics — that our
constitution safeguards secularism.

8.2.1.2 Definition of Secularism

There is no specific definition of the concept of secularism, however
eminent scholars, judges and great thinkers have explained it time to
time.
Chief Justice of India A.M. Ahmedi opined in a case that “the term secular
has advisedly not been defined presumably because it is a very elastic term not
capable of a precise definition but perhaps best left undefined There are several
features of the Constitution which arf strongly suggestive of secularism. The
prevalent cultural indicators are supportive of secularism. Some other judges have
delivered separate but concurring judgments on secularism as basic structure.
Secularism is, therefore, part of the fundamental law and basic structure of the
Indian political system to secure to its people socio-economic needs essential for
man ‘s excellence with material, moral prosperity. Some other judgments read as
“secularism is thus more than a passive attitude of religious tolerance.”
The Fifth Minorities Commission (1982-83) clarified that secularism in
India did not crusade for anti-religious faith. It said: “Our broad type of secularism
too/cs upon traditional religion, of every label, with benevolent neutrality. It would
like to see the end of exploitation or of use of religion for political and economic
purposes and to purge it of superstition and harmful predatory practice The impact
of our secularism operating as a new social, economic, ethical and moral force
resulting from modern knowledge, science and enlightenment can elevate
traditional religion by purging it of noxious elements”.
 According to D.E. Smith, a secular state is, “which guarantees individual
and corporate freedom of religion, deals with the individual as a citizen
irrespective of his religion, is not constitutionally connected to a particular
religion nor does it seek either to promote or interfere with religion”.
Pointing out non-discrimination by state in the matter of religion as the
essential feature of secularism, it was observed by Lakshmi Kant Maitra in the
Constituent Assembly:
“By secular State, as I understand it, is meant that the State is not going to make
any discrimination whatsoever on the ground of religion or community against any
person professing any particular form of religious faith... The State is not going to
establish, patronise or endow any particular religion to the exclusion of or in
preference to others and that no citizen in the State shall have any preferential
treatment or will be discriminated against simply on the ground that he professed a
particular form of religion.”
It was viewed by Ananthasayanam Ayyangar that secularism did not mean
irreligion. said, “I do not, by the word ‘secular’ mean that we do not believe in any
religion, and that have nothing to do in our day-to-day lfe. It only means that the
State or Government cannot aid one religion or give preference to one religion as
against another. Therefore it is obliged to be absolutely secular in character, not
that it has lost faith in all religions”.

8.2.1.3 Universal acceptance of Secularism

Indian secularism is religion affirming and not religion negating. The
necessary corollary to the absence of state patronage to any religion is the
freedom of religion to all. The Constitution permits practicing and propagating
religion. But the right to propagate one’s religion does not give right to
convert any person to
one’s own religion. The practices of conversions from Hinduism to
Christianity, Islam and Buddhism are against the secular provisions of the
Constitution. Furthermore unlike in India, the constitutions of many countries
in the world that provide freedom to religion do not guarantee the right to
propagate a fundamental right. The Swiss Constitution simply declares through
Article 49 “freedom creed and conscience is inviolable”. The Constitution of
Ireland and Japan says that the freedom of religion is guaranteed to all and so
is the case of China but it is the hitch that nowhere religious propaganda is a
fundamental right. (Art. 20 and Art. 44). The spirit of this right available in our
country is in consonance with the provisions of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.
The principle of ‘secularism’ as understood in the United States means
that the state and the church co-exist in the same human society without having
to do anything with each other. In Europe, the vision of secularism evolved as
the negation of all things religious, particularly in political functioning. In
India, it means the opposite, i.e., equal respect for all religions. A ‘secular
state’ in the Indian context means one, which protects all religions equally and
does not uphold any religion as the state religion.

8.2.2. Secularism under Indian Constitution

The constituent assembly which was constituted to frame a Constitution
for India declared eight guiding principles of Indian Constitution. Among these
eight basic and guiding principles of the Constitution—Secularism is placed in
fifth position. To that extent the Constitutional pundits gave importance for
secularism. The idea of secularism is essential to maintain unity in diversity.
Secularism is a basic ideology for the effective functioning of a healthy
Democracy. When the Indian Constitution was adopted in January 1950, it has
got sufficient provisions to
promote secularism. The Constitution of India firmly believes in the principle
of secularism.
The founding fathers of the Indian Constitution never hesitated to build
India on secular foundations. They opposed and defeated the amendment of
Mr. H. V. Kamath to invoke the name of god in the preamble of the
Constitution. Pandit Kunjru said that we invoke the name of God, but I am
bold to say that while we do so, we are showing a narrow, sectarian spirit,
which is contrary to the spirit of the Constitution. The Indian Flag consists of
Ashoka Chakra in its center. The wheel has many spokes but, all are of equal
length. It indirectly refers to the Indian stand on the principle of equal
treatment of all religions. (Sarva Dharma Sambava).
Although, the word ‘Secular’ was not there initially in the constitution,
a mere perusal of the various articles of it would amply demonstrate that
‘Secularism’ is an integral part of the Indian constitution. At this juncture, it
would not be inappropriate to have a glance at the relevant constitutional
provisions pertaining to secularism. Article 14 of the constitution provides for
equality before law for all people. Article 15, inter alia, lays down that the
state shall not discriminate any citizen on the ground of religion. Article 16
provides for equality of opportunity in matters of employment under the state,
irrespective of religion. Article 25 provides for freedom of conscience and the
right to profess, practice and propagate the religion of one’s choice.
The constitution not only guarantees a person’s freedom of religion and
conscience, but also ensures freedom for one who has no religion, and it
scrupulously restrains the state from making any discrimination on grounds of
religion. Article 26 provides freedom to manage religious affairs and Article
27 prohibits compulsion to pay taxes to benefit any religious denomination.
The impact of Secularism can also be seen in Article 28, which states that no
religious
instruction shall be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained
out of state funds. The analysis of the above said constitutional provisions
makes it amply clear that Indian secularism is unique and it treats all religions
alike. In our country, judiciary is the guardian of the constitution and it has
been held by the Supreme Court that secularism is a basic structure of the
constitution and it cannot be altered by a constitutional amendment.
Before looking into the Articles in the Constitution that are supposed to
interpret the idea of secularism, it will be worthwhile to look into one
important judgment given by the Supreme Court of India viz. Kesavananda
Bharati vs. State of Kerala case52 which was decided by a full Constitutional
bench of judges on April 24, 1973. By a water-thin majority of 7-6, the
Supreme Court held that the power to amend the Constitution under Article
368 couldn’t be exercised in such a manner as to destroy or emasculate the
fundamental features of the Constitution. In identifying the features, which are
fundamental and thus non-amendable in the constitution was this statement - A
secular State, that is, a State in which there is no State religion (5(vii)). This
was (probably) the first time that the concept of secularism was interpreted by
the Supreme Court. Here we get the first authorized interpretation of the word
“secular” as mentioned in our Constitution. So our basic idea of being a secular
state is that we do not have a ‘State religion’.

8.2.2.1. Preamble
“. . . THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute
India into a SOVERIGN, SOCIALIST, SECULAR, DEMOCRATIC,
REPUBLIC and to
secure to all its citizens...”. So we have decided that we will create India as a
secular state. The only other place where the word secular appears in
our
52
Kesawananda Bharti's case (AIR 1973 SC 1461)
 Constitution is in Article 25 (2) (a) while discussing the “Right to freedom of
religion”.
What is problematic in this context is the absence of a proper definition
of secularism. How can we interpret the term secularism? Do we interpret it as
the complete detachment of state from religious activities or do we accept the
original definition of Holyoake? What is the stand of the government regarding
this? To find answers to these questions, we have to look at the related
discussions in the Constituent Assembly. An important amendment
(Amendment 566) was moved in the meeting dated December 03, 1948 by
Prof. K.T. Shah. “The State in India being secular shall have no concern with
any religion, creed or profession of faith; and shall observe an attitude of
absolute neutrality in all matters relating to the religion of any class of its
citizens or other persons in the Union.” It is now clear that this idea of making
India a secular state was not there in the original draft. It was only on
December 18, 1976 the word “SECULAR” was added in the preamble of our
Constitution. The 42nd amendment Act reads — “In the Preamble to the
Constitution, - (a) for the words “SOVEREIGN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC”
the words “SOVERIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC
REPUBLIC” shall
be substituted”. So the word secular entered our Constitution only almost 25
years after it had come into effect.

8.2.2.2. Freedom of religion under Article 25

Article 25 of the Constitution of India guarantees to every citizen the right
to profess, practice and propagate religion. Article 25 reads as follows:
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, practice 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.
Explanation I: The wearing and carrying of Kirpans shall be deemed to be
included in the profession of the Sikh religion.
Explanation II: In sub-clause (b) of the clause (2), the reference to Hindus
shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh,
Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions
shall be construed accordingly.”

Accordingly Article 25 protects two freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience,
(b) freedom to profess, practice and propagate religion.

The freedom of conscience is absolute inner freedom of the citizen to

mould his own relation with God in whatever manner he likes. When this
freedom becomes articulate and expressed in outward form it is to profess and
practice religion. To profess religion means to declare freely and openly one’s
faith and belief. To practice religion is to perform the prescribed religious
duties, rites and
 rules. To propagate means to spread and practice his view for enlightening
others. The right to propagate one’s religion is not a right to convert other to
one’s own religion.
Article therefore postulates that there is no fundamental right to convert
another person one’s own religion, ‘because if a person purposefully
undertakes the conversion of another person to his religion as distinguished
from his effort to transmit or spread the tenets of his religion that would
impugn on the freedom of conscience guaranteed to all citizens of the country
alike’; as decided in Rev. Stainialaus v. St. of Madhya Pradesh53
The Supreme Court in Punjab Rao v. D. P. Meshram54, expresses that,
the right is not only to entertain such religious belief as may be approved by
his judgment or conscience but also to exhibit his sentiments in overt acts as
are enjoyed by religion. In the words of the Article, he may “profess a religion
means the right to declare freely and openly one’s faith.” And in Ratilal
Panachand Gandhi v. State of Bombay55, declares that he may freely practice
his religion; “Religious practices or performance of acts in pursuance of
religious belief are as much a part of religion as faith or belief in particular
doctrines”.
Rituals and observances, ceremonies and modes of worship considered
by a religion to be integrals and essentials part are also secured. What is
integral and essential part of a religion religious practice has to be decided by
the Courts with references to the doctrine of a particular religion include
practice regarded by the community as part of its religion as put forth by the
honourable Supreme Court in Seshammal v. state of Tamil Nadu56. Again in
Ratilal, the SC states that, he may

53
AIR 1977 SC 908
54
AIR 1966 SC 1179
55
AIR 1954 SC 388
56
(1972) 2 SCC 11
 propagate freely his religious views for the edification of others. It is
immaterial also whether a person makes the propagation in his individual
capacity or on behalf of some church institution.
If one makes an attempt to look at the secular aura in our Constitution,
the only point reach is Article 25, which refers “Right to freedom of religion”.
It reads thus— “Freedom 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 to freely profess, practice and propagate religion”.
In Boe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala 57 also known as National Anthem
case, the Supreme Court has upheld the religious belief of the Jehovahs
witness, a Christian community not to praise anybody but for his or her own
embodiment of God. In case the children of Jehovahs witness were expelled
from the school for refusing to sing National Anthem. The Supreme Court held
their religious practice was protected under Article 25. Chinnappa Reddy, J.,
observed “that the question is not whether a particular religious belief or
practice appeals to our reason of sentiment but whether the belief is genuinely
and conscientiously held as part of the profession or practice of religion. Our
personal views and reactions are irrelevant. If the belief is genuinely and
conscientiously attracts the protection of Article 25 but subject, of course, to
the limitations contained therein”.
The Indian constitution provides for the individual as well as collective
freedom of religion. The basic guarantee of this right of individual freedom is
in Art. 25 (1). This freedom extends to all persons including aliens underlined
by Supreme Court in Ratilal Panchand vs. of Bombay58. The Indian
Constitution

57
AIR 1987 SC 748
58
AIR 1954 SC 388
makes freedom of conscience as well as right to profess, practice and
propagate religion subject to state control in the interest of public morality and
health.
But Supreme Court has made it clear that state can have no power over
the conscience individual — this right is absolute. The Indian Penal Code
(sections 295-8) makes it a crime injure or defile a place of worship or to
disturb a religious assembly etc. even though these actions might be sanctioned
by offender’s own religion. Practices like devadasi, sati may have religious
sanctions but the state still has constitutional power to ban them. Art. 25(2)
grants to state broad, sweeping powers to interfere in religious matters. This
reflects peculiar needs Indian society. The extensive modification of Hindu
personal law has been by legislation based on this provision. Art. 25(2) thus
authorizes the state to regulate any secular activity associated with religion, to
legislate social reforms.
Article 25 gives freedom for all to practice any religion they want. This
is a basic right guaranteed in the Constitution. Article 26 (Freedom to manage
religious affairs), Article 27 (Freedom as to payment of taxes for promotion of
any particular religion) and Article 28 (Freedom as to attendance at religious
instruction or religious worship in certain educational institutions) can be
considered as the interpretations of the principle of secularism in the
constitution. Art. 26 deals with the freedom to manage religious affairs.
Accordingly any religious denomination is given right to establish religious
institutions, acquire properties (movable and immovable) and manage affairs
regarding the religion. Art. 27 is also very important which reads — “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 religious denomination.”
8.2.2.3. Restrictions on the freedom of religion
Restrictions to the enjoyment of Right to Religion:
The right to religion guaranteed under Article 25 is not an absolute
right, like other rights this right too can be restricted for the purpose of
maintaining public order, morality and health.
In addition Article 25 further exceptions are engrafted by clause (2) of
the Article. Sub- clause (a) of clause (2) saves the power of State to make laws
regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or secular activity
which may be associated with religious practice and sub-clause (b) reserves the
State’s power to make laws for providing for social welfare and social reform
even though they might interfere with religious practices.
In S.P. Mittal v Union of India59 the Government enacted the Auroville
(Emergency Provision) Act, to take away the management of Aurobindo
Society property on the ground of mismanagement of affairs. The petitioners
challenged the validity of the said Act on the ground that it violates Articles 25
and 26 of the Constitution. The Court held that teachings of Aurobindo did not
constitute ‘religion’ and therefore taking of Aurobindo Ashram did not infringe
the Society’s right under Articles 25 and 26. It further held, even if it was
assumed that the Society were a religious denomination, the Act did not
infringe its rights under Articles 25 and 26. The Act has taken only the right of
management of property of Auroville, in respect of secular matters, which can
be regulated by law.
Also, in Mohd. Hanf Quareshi v State of Bihar60 the petitioner claimed
that the sacrifices of cows on the occasion of Bakr-Id was essential part of his
religion and therefore the State law forbidding the slaughter of cows was
violative of his
59
AIR 1983 SC 1
60
AIR 1958 SC 731
 right to practice religion. Court rejecting the argument held that sacrifice of
cow on Bakr-Id day was not essential part of the Mohamedan religion and
hence could be prohibited by State under Clause 2(a) of Article 25.
In a another case State of West Bengal v Ashutosh Lahiri61 the Supreme
Court held that slaughter of cows on Bakrid day is optional and not obligatory.
It is not essential or required for religious purpose of Muslim. Article 25
deals with essential religious practices.

8.2.3. Right to religion -

8.2.3.1. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 recognizes the right
to religion in Art. 18 which say that “Everyone has the right to freedom of
thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his
religion or belief; and freedom, either alone or in community with others in
public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice,
worship and observance”. That makes it clear that an individual who is ‘born
free’ also has freedom to manifest his religious beliefs as he is free to practice
any religion, he is also free to change his religion. Either he automatically
adopts the religion practiced by his parents after his birth or has freedom to
choose his own. It is his absolute choice to profess his religion in private and if
he wishes he may join any religious group.

8.2.3.2. Civil and Political Convention 1966

In the Civil and Political Covenant, 1966, the right to religion is
discussed as follows: Article 18.

61
AIR 1995 SC 464

19
1. Ever one shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
This right shall include freedom to have or adopt a religion or belief of his
choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in
public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance,
practice and teaching.
2. No one shall be subject to coercion, which would impair his freedom to have or
to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.
3. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs may be subject only to such
limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety,
order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
4. The State Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the
liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardian to ensure the religious
and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.

8.2.3.3. Declaration on religious Discrimination, 1981

The Declaration on the Elimination of All forms of Intolerance and of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief adopted by General Assembly of
UN in 1982 states in Article 1,
1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
This right shall include freedom to have a religion or whatever belief of his
choice, freedom either individually or in community with others and in public or
private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and
teaching.
2. No one shall be subject to coercion, which would impair his freedom to have a
religion or belief of his choice.

20
3. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief may be subject only to such
limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to public safety, order,
health, or morals or the fundamental rights of freedoms of others.

8.2.4. Religious Fanaticism -

8.2.4.1. Religious fanatics-
Secularism in India is based on the rich heritage and culture steeped in
its various religions. The secular fabric of the country is very well reflected in
the phrase ‘Vasudhaiv Kutumbakam’ which means that the whole world is one
family. India has always been an inclusive society, which has welcomed
people of all religions and faiths with open arms, never discriminating among
religions and never considering any religion or faith to be a threat. But this
secular fabric has not meant that there is no communalism in India.
In spite of a number of laws treating people of all religions at par, India
has had a long history of communal riots, the worst of them being at the time
of partition of the country when blood flowed as rivers. In a land where
tolerance is byword for life, when did this hatred for fellow beings arise? The
answer to this question lies in the British rule of the country, particularly post-
1857. Prior to 1857, the British rulers restrained themselves from interfering in
the social structure of the country. Post-i 857, they realized the importance of
dividing the people of the country in order to weaken them. This gave rise to
the ‘divide and rule’ policy, which they used, on religious lines thus distancing
Hindus and Muslims.
The persistence of this policy of the British is reflected in the painful
partition of the country and the displacement of a large number of people from
their hearths and homes. This has continued even after the independence
of the

21
country in spite of the government being neutral as far as religion is concerned
and the constitution ensuring that there is no discrimination on the basis of
religion as far as employment, education etc. are concerned. This is apparently
on account of minimal social interaction between various religious
communities leading to a distorted view of other communities and its
practitioners. Such a social interaction is especially important to heal the scars
and pain of the partition. The delicate secular fabric could not withstand the
body blow of the partition. This situation was sought to be remedied through
the provisions of the constitution. The pain of the partition revisited the
country in the form of communal violence riots from time to time, as if not to
let people forget their wounds. The action or inaction of the political leaders
and the administrative system at times also added to the communal frenzy.
Some major events which changed the way world viewed India were based on
communal frenzy viz. Babri Masfid demolition, the Gujarat riots, Delhi (Sikh)
riots.
Babri Masjid located at Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh was demolished on
December 6, 1992 by kar sevaks under the guidance of some of our leaders
who are facing trial in the case. The demolition of the Babri Masjid made the
fabled respect for all religions that Indians have a thing of the past. The fact,
that a religious shrine of any religion could be demolished, raises questions
about the secularity of the people of the country as also the conviction of the
state towards secularism.
The Gujarat violence in 2002 is a matter of great shame for the country.
The fact, that people were massacred only on account of their belonging to a
particular religion, is unacceptable in any secular nation. The fact, that the
administration reacted late, also raises questions regarding the State’s belief in
secularism. A similar incident, which happened about two decades prior to
the Gujarat violence,

22
 was the riots of Delhi in 1984. Sikhs were brutally slaughtered on the streets of
Delhi just because the person who assassinated the then Prime Minister of
India, Smt. Indira Gandhi happened to be a Sikh. It is ironic that this killing
happened to exact revenge for the death of the person who was instrumental in
incorporating the word ‘secular’ in the Indian constitution.
Needless to say it is totally unfair comparison. In fact one cannot take
values of one religion and compare it with history of other. Values must be
compared with values and history must be compared with history. While
values are divine, humanitarian and common to all religions, history is full of
violence perpetrated by various vested interests, power struggle within or two
or more faith communities and often represents worst side of human
behaviour. It should not be blamed on religion.
Thus what happens in history should not be taken as representative of
religious values or religious norms, much less its cause. These massacres and
killings represent nothing but lust for power and wealth by some followers of
that religion. It has nothing to do with the teachings of that religion. Every
religion gives us certain norms and values to improve our conduct and to make
us good or even perfect human beings. It is true religion is misused by all sorts
of interests and more often than not. It is sought to be misused as it strongly
appeals to our emotions and can easily create feeling of ‘we’ versus ‘they’ but
nevertheless it is misused and for misuse we cannot blame religion.
As Asghar Ali Engineer rightly puts it, “Let us be very clear on one thing
that no religion would be acceptable to people just because it allows killing or
conversion. A religion is acceptable only f improves morality, controls basic
instincts and brings about spiritual and moral change for better. It is extremely
knave to believe that a religion would spread by sword”.

23
8.2.4.2. Religion and Terrorism-
The supreme laws of the land, rightly described India as a secular
country in which the State has no religion, nor does it seek to promote or
discourage any religion or religious belief. It guarantees a complete religious
freedom, with the absence of any compulsion whatsoever in religious matters.
Thus, it is obvious that the Government and people of India are secular, that is,
there is no official religion. The State is committed to a policy of
noninterference in religious matters.
Religion is a matter of personal beliefs and convictions. But how far are
“we the people of India” secular in thought, word and deed? Upon a close
observation of the working of our political parties, we shall find that
candidates for elections are often chosen on
communal considerations—Hindu candidates for
constituencies having maximum Hindu electorate, Muslim candidates for areas
where the large number of the voters are Muslims. Also we find that the
voting in elections is often on communal lines; Hindus voting for Hindu
candidates, Muslims for Muslim candidates and Sikhs for Sikh. Although the
political parties are not formed on a religious basis, we often find that there
are some distinctly communal parties in this ‘secular country’. The emerging
concepts like “vote banks,” augments ‘caste’ factor and plays a decisive role
in leading the followers to exercise their franchise for a particular candidate
in name of religion. Religion should have no connection whatever with
politics. But is it really so in India today? Instead of creating amicability
amongst the public of all the religion the fundamentalist and politicians are
hand in glove. The social fabric gets destroyed by religious controversies.
Once the religious fanatics or fundamentalist come face to face they destroy
the balance created by these aspects. Overt act of fanatic is to
24
 cause injury to other in such a way that the enjoyment of human rights of the
individual as well as the society at large is impaired. Thus leads to terrorism.
Terrorism is a global phenomenon. No doubt it has direct impact on
human being, with shattering loss of right to life, liberty and physical integrity
of victims. In addition to this individual loss, terrorism has destabilized
Governments, weaken civil society, jeopardize peace and security, and threaten
social and economic development.
The common understanding of the world ‘terrorism’ is: any organised
programme of individual, social groups or political groups of using force to
create fear or panic. It is belief in resorting to violence for the purpose of
bringing pressure on the government and nongovernmental bodies and
individual to agree to the view point of the perpetrators and compel all to
concede to terror demands.
The United Nations General Assembly in the open sessions of their 531
meeting explained terrorism in the following words “In its wider sense,
terrorism is the tactic of using an act or threat of violence against individuals or
groups to change the outcome of some process of politics”
The basic question is why at all terrorism has grown so fast and
steadily? Why is it a threat to the civil society? Who is responsible for the
growth of terrorism is it the religious fanatics or fundamentalist or politicians
or business class?

8.3. Questions for self learning

I. Write true or false:
1. Secularism is an official policy of India. ( )
2. During the ancient period politics was a dominant factor in the
human society ( )

25
3. Some countries have religion as the base for their Government. ( )
4. Unity in diversity is a base for Indian cultural nationalism. ( )

II. Choose the correct answer:

1. Secularism is followed in
a) India b) Turkey c) Pakistan
2. The forty second amendment in Indian constitution was made in the
year a) 1976 b) 1977 c) 1978
3. Indian constitution was adopted in the
year a) 1935 b) 1950 c) 1947

III. Write briefly:

1. How can we promote secularism?
2. Write short notes on 42nid amendment.
3. write short note on Religious Fanaticism

IV. Write in detail:

1. Discuss the concept of Secularism as highlighted by the Constitution.
2. Explain how our Indian constitution is purely secular in character.
3. Discuss the effect of terrorism on the secular fabric of India
8.4. Let us sum up
The decision arrived at by the judges in the S.R. Bommai ‘s case and
Ismail Faruqul ‘s case reemphasized the concept of secularism being the basic
feature of the Constitution. The only issue relating to the basic feature was
whether secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution, which was answered
in the affirmative. It would be thus clear that Constitution made clear
demarcation
26
between religious part personal to the individual and secular part thereof. The
State does not extend patronage to any religion; State is neither pro-any
particular religion nor anti-any particular religion. It stands aloof, in other
words, it maintains neutrality in matters of religion and provides equal
protection to all religions subject to regulation and actively act on secular part.
Acquisition of certain land under Ayodhaya Act, 1993 was held to be
negation of law and therefore invalid and the court held that the greatest
religious tensions are not those between any one religion and another; they
rather are the tensions between the fundamentalist and pluralist in each and
every religious tradition. The intention of the constitutional guarantee on
minority rights, as we understand it is to promote and to protect the
distinctiveness of religious and linguistic minorities in the country.
Secularism may be defined as the “neutrality of the state in matters
relating to religion or creed”. It may also be understood as ‘non-patronizing’
attitude of the state to any one religion. In a secular state, there is no state
religion and every citizen is free to preach, practice and propagate any religion.
Thus, secularism defines the way the people of a country carry on their
individual affairs as also their behaviour towards others.
The hatred of statues in Islam emanate from Islam’s intense hatred of
Idol- worship, over which Muslim never fail to point fingers at Hinduism. In
reality, true Hinduism, the Sanatan Dharma, is monotheistic like Islam.

8.5. Glossary:
Secularism: Secularism as a means of liberation from prejudices and
communal frenzies has inherent competence to enhance the worth of human
rights and welfare

27
 Fanaticism: dedicationtowards a particular religion,
passion for religious obligations extremism of dedication and
passion is fanaticism
Terrorism: threats created in society through violence is Terrorism

8.6. References / Bibliography.

1. Asghar Au Engineer: Contemporary Challenges To Secularism And Democracy
— A Religious Response April 1-15, 2005
2. Constitutional Assembly Debate CAD, Vol. VII, 3-12-1948, at pp. 815-16.
3. Constitutional Assembly Debate CAD, Vol. VII, 6-12-1948, at p. 831.
4. Donald Eugene Smith, India as a Secular State (Princeton University Press,
Princeton 1963)
5. Fflh Annual Report of Minorities Commission of India, 1982-83;
6. Human Rights, Terrorism and Counter-terrorism Fact Sheet No. 32 Office of
the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva,
Switzerland.
7. M.P. Jam, Indian Constitutional Law, Wadhwa and Co. Nagpur, 2004
8. Pandey J.N., Constitutional Law of India, (Central Law Agency, Allahabad,
1997) p. 137
9. Secularism and the Law: National Foundation for Communal Harmony New
Delhi August 2002
Cases cited

1. Athiest Society of India, Nalgonda District Branch v Government of Andhra

Pradesh AIR 1992 AP 310
2. Azeez Basha v. Union of India AI R 1968 SC 622
3. Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala (AIR 1987 SC 748)
28
4. Bira Kishore v State of Orissa, AIR 1975 Ori. 8.

29
5. Commissioner HRE v. L.T. Swamiar AIR 1961 SC 282
6. Dr. M. Ismail Faruqui v. Union of India, (1994) 6 SCC 360
7. Ismail Farooqi v. Union of India, ((1994) 6 SCC 360)
8. Jagannath Ramanuj Das v State of Orissa, AIR 1975 Ori. 8.
9. K. Raghunath v State of Kerala, AIR 1974 ker.48
10.Mohd. Hanif Quareshi v. State of Bihar AIR 1958 SC
731
11.Punjab Rao v. D. P. Meshram, (AIR 1966 SC 1179)
12.Ratilal Panachand Gandhi v. State of Bombay, (AIR 1954 SC
388) 13.Rev. Stainialaus v. St. of Madhya Pradesh (AIR 1977
SC 908)
14.S.P. Mittal v. Union of India AIR 1983 SC 1.
15.S.R. Bommai v. Union of India AIR
16. Seshammal v. state of Tamil Nadu, (1972) 2 SCC 11
17. Shastri Yagnapurushdasji v Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya. AIR 1966
SC 1119
18. State of Bombay v Narasu, AIR 1952 Bom. 84.
19.State of West Bengal v. Ashutosh Lahiri AIR 1995 SC
464
*****

30