Abstract

Article 25 of the constitution of India extends to persons freedom to profess and propagate their religion. However there is a lot of jurisprudence involved in the interpretation of Article 25 of the Constitution. There is a further distinction between “secular activities” and “essential religious practices or tenets” of religion. The former gets lesser protection than the latter. The only grounds in which the latter can be restricted are enlisted in Article 25 (1) of the constitution. Public Order, Morality, Health and other provisions of Part III are the sole grounds upon which the essential practices of the religion can be curbed. The secular activities on the other hand can be curbed by the state on both the previous grounds as well as on the grounds mentioned in Article 25 (2) (a) of the constitution. In the light of the Sabrimala judgement the Supreme Court has reiterated its principle wherein it has been shown that Article 25 of the constitution is subject to the Article 14, 15 and 17 of the constitution. And basically even the practices protected under Article 25 have to withstand the test of Article 15 of the constitution. With the appearance of Indian Young Lawyers Association v State of Kerala things have changed on a grand scale even in matters of religion. The case is a landmark one which says that discriminating against women on physiological grounds is blatantly wrong and is immoral. The Supreme Court while giving the verdict has observed that criticising or castigating something which is via nature is not at all acceptable. Article 25 of the constitution of India extends to persons freedom to profess and propagate their religion. However there is a lot of jurisprudence involved in the interpretation of Article 25 of the Constitution. There is a further distinction between “secular activities” and “essential religious practices or tenets” of religion. The former gets lesser protection than the latter. The only grounds in which the latter can be restricted are enlisted in Article 25 (1) of the constitution. Public Order, Morality, Health and other provisions of Part III are the sole grounds upon which the essential practices of the religion can be curbed. The secular activities on the other hand can be curbed by the state on both the previous grounds as well as on the grounds mentioned in Article 25 (2) (a) of the constitution. In the light of the Sabrimala judgement the Supreme Court has reiterated its principle wherein it has been shown that Article 25 of the constitution is subject to the Article 14, 15 and 17 of the constitution. And basically even the practices protected under Article 25 have to withstand the test of Article 15 of the constitution. With the appearance of Indian Young Lawyers Association v State of Kerala things have changed on a grand scale even in matters of religion. The case is a landmark one which says that discriminating against women on physiological grounds is blatantly wrong and is immoral. The Supreme Court while giving the verdict has observed that criticising or castigating something which is via nature is not at all acceptable.

Keywords