is religion a divisive factor? explain the notion of secularism in contemporary india

 Religion can indeed be a divisive factor in society, particularly in a diverse and pluralistic nation like India. While it can foster community and social cohesion among adherents, it can also lead to conflict and division, especially when differing religious beliefs intersect with social, political, and economic issues.

 Religion as a Divisive Factor

Cohesion vs. Division

- Cohesive Role: Religion often acts as a unifying force among its followers, creating a sense of belonging and shared identity through common beliefs, practices, and rituals. It provides moral guidance and a framework for social behavior, which can strengthen community bonds.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Caste Or Religion Of Parties Should Not Be Mentioned In Any Filings Before Courts

 Before parting with this matter, we have noted with surprise that the caste of both the parties has been mentioned in the memo of parties, besides their other details. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if the memo of parties as filed before the courts below is changed in any manner, the Registry raises an objection and in the present case as the caste of both the parties was mentioned before the court below, he had no option but to mention their caste in the Transfer Petition.{Para 10}

11. We see no reason for mentioning the caste/religion of any litigant either before this Court or the courts below. Such a practice is to be shunned and must be ceased forthwith. It is

therefore deemed appropriate to pass a general order directing that henceforth the caste or religion of parties shall not be mentioned in the memo of parties of a petition/proceeding filed before this Court, irrespective of whether any such details have been furnished before the courts below. A direction is also issued to all the High Courts to ensure that the caste/religion ofa litigant does not appear in the memo of parties in any petition/suit/proceeding filed before the High Court or the Subordinate Courts under their respective jurisdictions.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 1957 OF 2023

SHAMA SHARMA Vs  KISHAN KUMAR.

Dated: JANUARY 10, 2024.

Print Page

Whether wife can be denied interim maintenance U/S 24 of Hindu Marriage Act if she has converted herself from Hinduism to other religion?

We have heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the materials placed on record. In an application filed either by the husband or wife under Section 24 of The Hindu Marriage Act, the financial status of the parties and his or her capability to maintain himself or herself as the case may be during the pendency of the matrimonial proceedings alone is required to be considered. At this stage, what is required to be decided is the resourcefulness or otherwise of the applicant to maintain himself or herself during the pendency of the matrimonial proceedings. For this purpose, the Courts are not required to take note of the conversion of either the husband or wife to any other religion as contemplated under Section 18(2)(f) of The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 or it will be a ground to deny interim maintenance sought for in an application under Section 24 of The Hindu Marriage Act. In other words, Section 18(2)(f) The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 has no application for considering the claim of the husband or wife as the case may be for interim maintenance under Section 24 of The Hindu Marriage Act. 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1409 of 2017

Decided On: 06.07.2017

 K. Gurusamy Vs.  G. Malliga

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

R. Subbiah and A.D. Jagadish Chandira, JJ.

Citation: AIR 2017 Madras 286

Print Page

Whether religion of wife merges with religion of husband after marriage?

The Supreme Court on Thursday disagreed with a ruling by the Bombay High Court which said that a woman’s religion merges with her husband’s after an inter-religion marriage. The apex court also requested the Valsad Zoroastrian Trust to review its decision to prohibit a Parsi woman from performing the last rites of her parents because she married a man from another religion.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AK Sikri, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan also observed that a Parsi man marrying outside his community wasn’t barred from entering the Tower of Silence but a Parsi woman was. “Marriage does not mean a woman mortgages herself to her husband. Prima facie, we do not accept this merger principle,” the bench said.

“There is no law which debars a woman from entering the Tower of Silence after marrying outside the community,” the bench added. It also asked the trust to understand the emotions of a child towards her parents.

“Special Marriage Act was enacted so that a man and woman professing different faiths can marry and retain their religious identity after marriage. There is no question of merger of woman’s religion with that of her husband’s. Only she on her own volition can give up her religion,” the bench said appreciating senior advocate Indira Jaising arguing on behalf of Goolrokh M Gupta.

The Parsi woman, Goolrokh M Gupta, who married a Hindu man, was barred by the Valsad Zoroastrian Trust from performing the last rites of her parents as she had married outside her community. Goolrokh sought the Bombay High Court’s permission to perform her parents’ last rites when they died but the court ruled in favour of the trust.

Print Page

Image of Judge can not be tarnished merely for reason of his religion

On reading the petition and the averments made
therein, we have no doubt in holding that the petition
which is styled as PIL is nothing but a camouflage to foster
cheap and malicious publicity. It is not being disputed by
the learned counsel, that the petitioner before the court is
a political person and a busy body. The grievance of the
petitioner is primarily the religion of the Judge appointed(8)
to head the Commission of Inquiry under Act, 1952. Such
a pleading laid and pressed before a constitutional Court,
admittedly, is against the constitutional scheme without
any foundation and basis. Religion has not been assigned
any role in the appointment of judges of commissions or
for that matter for any office under the State, as such, the
petition is not only malicious but has been filed with an
ulterior motive which tantamounts to interfere not only
with the judicial process but also goes to the root in
questioning the constitutional scheme based on rule of
law.
In the given facts of this case, a serious issue on
communal lines has been pleaded tarnishing the image of
the Judge merely for the reason of his religion, which has
been the modus operandi of Sri Pande in several earlier
petitions drafted and filed by him.

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 13915 of 2016
Petitioner :- Indra Pal Singh (I.P. Singh)
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Home Civil
Sectt. Lucknown &Ors
Dated:13-6-2016

Print Page

Supreme court: Person can change his religion and faith but not the caste to which he belongs

In K.P. Manu v. Scrunity Committee for Verification
of Community Certificate (2015) 4 SCC 1, one of 
the questions examined by
this Court is – whether on re-conversion, a person born to
Christian parents could, after reconversion to the Hindu
religion, be eligible to claim the benefit of his original caste.
Referring to various case laws, including those referred above,
this Court disagreed with the finding of Scrutiny Committee
that caste certificate issued to a person on the basis of the fact
that though the great grandfathers of such person belonged to
Pulaya community (i.e. Scheduled Caste), but he was born
after his ancestors embraced Christianity and thereafter,
reconverted into Hindu religion is not entitled to the
Scheduled Caste certificate. Constitution Bench decision in
Guntur Medical College (supra) and three-Judge Bench
decisions in S. Anbalagan (supra) and Kailash Sonkar
(supra) are referred to and relied upon in K.P. Manu (supra).
22. In the case at hand, admittedly the appellant was born to
muslim parents. However, he has proved that his family
members though followed Islam but they belonged to “Doom”

community. It is settled law that a person can change his
religion and faith but not the caste, to which he belongs, as
caste has linkage to birth. It is proved on the record that the
appellant was issued a caste certificate as he was found to be
member of ‘Doom’ community by the competent authority,
after he declared that he has embraced Sikhism, and he was
accepted by the Sikh community. It is not disputed that
‘Doom’ in Punjab is a Scheduled Caste under Constitution
(Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. The Scheduled Caste
Certificate No. 6149 dated 25.08.2006 (Exh PG/2) was issued
to the appellant by the competent authority, and accepted by
the returning officer. Said certificate appears to have not been
cancelled. What is shown on behalf of the respondent is that
vide communication dated 17.11.2008 (Ext. PJ) State
authorities informed and clarified to the Deputy Commissioner
that members following Islam are not entitled to the certificate
of Scheduled Caste, and if issued, certificates may be
cancelled. But the certificate (PG/2) dated 25.08.2006 already
issued in favour of appellant, is not cancelled, which he
obtained after his conversion to Sikhism. It is proved on the
record that the appellant embraced Sikh religion on
13.04.2006, and got published the declaration on 04.01.2007
in the newspapers Hindustan Times (English) Exh.RA, and Ajit
(Punjabi) Exh RB. Nomination for election in question was
filed by him five years thereafter. The appellant has further
sufficiently explained that since he was popular as a singer
with the name – ‘Mohammad Sadique’ as such without
changing his name, he accepted Sikhism and followed all rites
and traditions of Sikh Religion.
23. It is not essential for anyone to change one’s name after
embracing a different faith. However, such change in name
can be a corroborating fact regarding conversion or
reconversion into a religion/faith in appropriate cases. Also it
is not necessary in law that entire family of a person should
convert or reconvert to the religion to which he has converted.
RW-5 Mohammad Sadique has stated that he not only
followed Sikh traditions, he never offered Namaz, nor observed
Roza nor went to Haj. It is also relevant to mention here that
PW-7 Darbara Singh Guru (respondent-Election Petitioner) in
his cross-examination admits that he did not raise any
objection at the time when nomination papers were filed by the
appellant.
Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4870 OF 2015
Mohammad Sadique … Appellant
Versus
Darbara Singh Guru … Respondent
Dated;April 29, 2016.
Prafulla C. Pant, J.

Print Page

Whether govt press can deny request of citizen to declare in gazette that he does not belong to any religion?

 Freedom of conscience under Article 25 of the Constitution
encompasses in itself a freedom to an individual to take a view that he
does not belong to any religion. The freedom conferred by Article 25
of the Constitution also includes a right of an individual to claim that he
is an 'Atheist'. As the freedom of conscience confers a fundamental
right to entertain a religious belief, it also confers a right on an
individual to express an opinion that he does not belong to any religion.
 No authority which is a State within the meaning of Article
12 of the Constitution of India or any of its agency or instrumentality
can infringe the fundamental right to freedom of conscience. Any
individual in exercise of right of freedom of conscience is entitled to
carry an opinion and express an opinion that he does not follow any
religion or any religious tenet. He has right to say that he does not
believe in any religion. Therefore, if he is called upon by any agency or

instrumentality of the State to disclose his religion, he can always state
that he does not practice any religion or he does not belong to any
religion. He cannot to be compelled to state that he professes a
particular religion.
10. The prayer made in this Petition is to direct the Respondents
to recognize “No Religion” as a form of religion. When an individual
says that he does not practice or profess any religion, he does not
belong to any religion or any religious sect. The other part of the
Prayer Clause (A) seeks a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents
not to insist on writing/mentioning/specifying/quoting religion in any
of its forms or declarations which are to be filled in by a citizen. No
individual can be compelled to state that he belongs to a particular
religion, though he does not practice or profess the said religion. He
has a fundamental right to state that he does not profess or practice any
religion and, therefore, what follows is the second part of the Prayer
Clause (A) which will have to be granted. Therefore, the Government
Printing Press cannot deny request of a citizen to declare in the gazette
that he does not belong to any religion.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.139 OF 2010
 Dr. Ranjeet Suryakant Mohite, )

Vs
 The Union of India, 
CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.S.CHANDURKAR, JJ

DATE ON WHICH JUDGMENT IS PRONOUNCED: 23RD SEPTEMBER 2014
Citation2015(2) ALLMR55

Print Page