Freedom of Conscience under Article 25
Syllabussignificant provisions and basic structure
Freedom of conscience protects a person's inner liberty to form, hold, change or reject religious beliefs according to personal conviction. Article 25 also protects the outward freedom to profess, practise and propagate religion, subject to constitutionally specified limits. It applies equally to all persons, not merely citizens.
Scope of the protection
The guarantee protects both the inward domain of belief and its outward manifestation. It prevents the State from compelling religious conformity merely because a belief or conscientious religious choice is unpopular.
- To profess means openly to declare one's religious beliefs.
- To practise includes performing religious observances and acts protected as part of religion.
- To propagate means communicating or explaining one's religious tenets to others; it does not confer a right forcibly to convert another person.
- The freedom includes the choice not to profess or participate in a religious observance when that choice genuinely follows from conscience.
Constitutional limits and state regulation
The freedoms under Article 25 are subject to public order, morality and health, as well as the other Fundamental Rights. They therefore do not create an unlimited exemption from valid laws.
- Under Article 25(2)(a), the State may regulate economic, financial, political or other secular activities associated with religion.
- Under Article 25(2)(b), the State may enact measures for social welfare and reform and open Hindu public religious institutions to all classes and sections of Hindus.
- The wearing and carrying of the kirpan is expressly treated as part of the profession of the Sikh religion.
Judicial clarification
In Shirur Mutt, 1954, the Supreme Court distinguished matters of religion from secular administration associated with religion. In Bijoe Emmanuel, 1986, it protected students who respectfully stood but declined, on genuine religious grounds, to sing the National Anthem. In Rev. Stainislaus, 1977, the Court held that propagation does not include a fundamental right to convert another person.
Keep reading
The news behind topics like this, explained every morning
Every morning Gyaanam reads The Hindu, the Indian Express and PIB and picks what matters for UPSC. Each story is written up against the syllabus line it belongs to. Your first 7 days are free.