Brief Context
Context The Supreme Court of India has recently held that the freedom of religion under Article 25 and the right to privacy under Article 21 are deeply interlinked. Supreme Court ruling The judgment arose in response to multiple petitions challenging provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, highlighting the constitutional balance between individual autonomy and state control. It stated that privacy is a “condition precedent” for exercising freedom of re
Source Content
Syllabus: GS2/ Polity and Governance
Context
- The Supreme Court of India has recently held that the freedom of religion under Article 25 and the right to privacy under Article 21 are deeply interlinked.
Supreme Court ruling
- The judgment arose in response to multiple petitions challenging provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, highlighting the constitutional balance between individual autonomy and state control.
- It stated that privacy is a “condition precedent” for exercising freedom of religion, as personal faith choices are rooted in internal belief and conscience.
- The court observed that state interference in personal belief systems, such as mandatory disclosure of conversion or prior state approval, can violate both privacy and religious freedom.
Significance of the judgement
- The judgment calls for a balance between protecting vulnerable individuals from coercion and respecting voluntary faith changes.
- It promotes tolerance by affirming that belief is personal and beyond state surveillance.
- It represents continuity in the Supreme Court’s shift toward expanding the “zone of personal liberty” under Article 21.
- The Court’s reasoning aligns with Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M. (2018), where the Supreme Court upheld an individual’s autonomy in matters of faith and marriage, affirming that such choices are central to personal liberty.
Constitutional Provisions
- Article 25(1): Guarantees all persons the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, and health.
- Article 25(2)(b): Permits the State to regulate or restrict religious conversions in the interest of public order, morality, or health, but does not allow interference with voluntary personal faith changes.
- Article 21: Guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which has been judicially expanded to include privacy, encompassing the internal freedom of thought, belief, and conscience in Justice K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2017.
- Article 19(1)(a): Ensures the freedom of speech and expression, including the right to express or withhold one’s religious identity.
Concluding remarks
- The ruling redefines the scope of religious liberty by recognising that faith and privacy are two sides of the same constitutional coin.
- It strengthens the principle that individual autonomy must prevail over state control in matters of conscience.
- It calls for laws and policies that protect citizens from coercion while respecting personal choices rooted in belief and dignity.
Source: TOI