Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, members of the 'Full Gospel Church of God', filed a Public Interest Litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Union of India and the State of Maharashtra to recognize 'No Religion' as a form of religion and to not insist on disclosure of religion in any forms or declarations. They contended that their organization believes in Lord Jesus Christ but does not believe in any religion, and that the State cannot compel citizens to disclose their religion. The court examined Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion. The court noted that while Article 25 protects the right to hold no religious beliefs, it does not create a corresponding duty on the State to recognize 'No Religion' as a religion. The court found that the petitioners' prayer was not supported by any legal right or statutory provision, and that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to compel the State to act in a manner not mandated by law. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Right to Freedom of Religion - Article 25 of the Constitution of India - Recognition of 'No Religion' - The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing the State to recognize 'No Religion' as a form of religion and to not insist on disclosure of religion in forms or declarations. The court held that Article 25 guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion, but does not confer a right to compel the State to recognize 'No Religion' as a religion. The petition was dismissed as the prayer was not supported by any legal right or statutory provision. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State can be compelled to recognize 'No Religion' as a form of religion and to not insist on disclosure of religion in forms or declarations.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed.
Law Points
- Right to freedom of religion under Article 25 does not include right to compel State recognition of 'No Religion' as a religion
- State cannot be directed to recognize 'No Religion' as a form of religion
- Writ of mandamus cannot be issued to compel State to act in a manner not supported by law
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (09) 93
Public Interest Litigation No.139 of 2010
A.S. Oka, A.S. Chandurkar
Shri Surel S. Shah for the Petitioners, Shri Parag Vyas for Respondent No.1, Shri S.N. Patil, AGP for Respondent No.2
Dr. Ranjeet Suryakant Mohite, Kishore Ramakant Nazare, Subhash Suryakant Ranaware
The Union of India, The State of Maharashtra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Public Interest Litigation seeking recognition of 'No Religion' as a form of religion and direction to State not to insist on disclosure of religion.
Remedy Sought
Writ of mandamus directing respondents to recognize 'No Religion' as a form of religion and not to insist on writing/mentioning/specifying/quoting religion in any forms or declarations.
Filing Reason
Rejection of applications by the State Government Printing Press for gazette notification recording that petitioners belong to 'No Religion'.
Issues
Whether the State can be compelled to recognize 'No Religion' as a form of religion.
Whether the State can be directed to not insist on disclosure of religion in forms or declarations.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that Article 25 of the Constitution confers freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion, which includes the right to claim no religion, and the State cannot compel disclosure of religion.
Respondents opposed the petition, contending that the prayer is not supported by any legal right or statutory provision.
Ratio Decidendi
Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion, but does not confer a right to compel the State to recognize 'No Religion' as a religion. A writ of mandamus cannot be issued to compel the State to act in a manner not supported by law.
Judgment Excerpts
The contention of the Petitioners is that the State cannot compel any citizen to disclose his religion while submitting forms and/or declarations.
The only substantive prayer in the Petition is Prayer Clause (A)...
The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners is based on the Article 25 of the Constitution of India.
Procedural History
Notice for final disposal at the admission stage was issued on 12th March 2014. Submissions were heard on 22nd July 2014. Judgment pronounced on 23rd September 2014.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 25
