INTRODUCTION
Does it ever strike your mind what it really means to be a secular state? “A secular state guarantees individual and corporate freedom of religion, deals with individuals as citizens irrespective of their religion, and is not constitutionally connected to a particular religion”, says Donald Eugene Smith, a political scientist. The Indian Constitution under Article 25[1] guarantees freedom of religion, and this is where most people misunderstand what secularism actually means. Some people assume that secularism means total exclusion of religion from the public sphere, but instead the Constitution protects public practice, profession and propagation of religion, subject to reasonable restrictions. This blog will help you understand the term ‘secularism’ and Article 25 of the Constitution of India.[2] actually guarantees in straightforward terms. The blog will consist of everyday examples and case law to better understand, and at the end, we will be able to determine whether India is truly a secular state.
WHAT DOES “SECULARISM” MEAN IN INDIA?
Secularism in India, though it first emerged during the freedom movement, was shaped during deliberations in the Constituent Assembly. Leaders like Mahatma Gandhi viewed religion as a moral force that would guide the public’s life, whereas B.R Ambedkar emphasised constitutional morality and the need to protect the state from any religious dominance that would violate an individual’s right. Further, Jawaharlal Nehru advocated for a modern, pluralist state that would commit to religious neutrality. The different perspective. Thus, the founding fathers faced a constitutional dilemma in accommodating all the diverse religions while aiming to protect the State from any religious dominance or identification of the State with any particular religion in a deeply pluralist society. And they chose secularism, unlike the Western democracies, which describe secularism as the strict separation of Church and State, where the State does not intervene in the religious practices. In contrast, the Indian model of secularism is about creating a space where multiple faiths can coexist, flourish, and contribute to the nation’s fabric while ensuring that all the religions are treated with equal respect by the State.[3] Thus, the Indian constitutional framework permits State regulation for religious practices in order to ensure the public order, morality, and social reform, and not as arbitrary interference with essential religious practices.
What Article 25 actually guarantees: Secularism existed in substance way before 1976, but was later made explicit by the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976. According to the Preamble, India is a “sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic.” Various provisions in the Indian Constitution reflect the ideals of secularism, such as Article 14 (guarantees equality before law), Article 15 (prohibits discrimination based on religion), and most importantly, Articles 25-28 that balance morality and public order with religious freedom[4].
Article 25 guarantees every person:
- Right to profess a religion
- Right to practice a religion
- Right to propagate a religion
However, this right is not absolute. This freedom should not be detrimental to public order, morality, or health. For example, if you play loudspeakers at night due to some religious activity, the State, in the interest of public order and the right to health of others, may regulate such activities as using loudspeakers does not constitute essential religious practices and it would infringe upon the fundamental rights of others under Article 21. If it falls under any of the grounds aforesaid, then freedom of religion cannot be entertained. Also, it allows the state to regulate the economic, financial, and political activities related to any religious activities.
INDIA’S UNIQUE MODEL: ‘PRINCIPLED DISTANCE’
India’s secular model of ‘principled distance’ is a term coined by a political thinker, Rajeev Bhargava, to describe how India’s secularism works[5]. Under his work, he mentions how the Indian Constitution appears internally complex, as some articles support individualist interpretations, whereas others support non-individualist interpretations. Some articles treat separation as exclusion, whereas others treat it as non-preferential treatment. Even though some critics like Donald Smith and Partha Chatterjee comment that India can never be truly secular, as Smith’s[6] work suggests that India’s state-interventionist secularism totally departs from the idea of strict secular separation and makes it difficult to achieve in real practice. Whereas Chatterjee[7] argues that India’s secularism reflects the state’s positive intervention rather than religious neutrality, due to which India would fail to protect the minorities’ autonomy. Bhargava’s response to it remains that the constitution did not betray secularism; instead, it developed a new variant. He talked about four features of India’s socio-cultural context:
- Enormous religious diversity.
- Emphasis on religious practice, not beliefs.
- Many religiously sanctioned practices are oppressive; they promote inequality, thus requiring reforms.
- Hinduism lacks a centralised reforming authority, unlike the Church in the West.
Later, Bhargava tried to interpret Smith’s strict model of secularism and concluded by saying that Smith’s model is too rigid, too Western, and too individualistic to work for India. Therefore, he coined the term ‘ Principled Distance’ where the State would neither wholly intervene nor wholly withdraw itself. The State will maintain a distance that is not fixed but is based on justice, equality, freedom, welfare, and the well-being of the vulnerable groups. The distance is not rigid but flexible, moral, and contextual.5
CASE LAWS
S.R. Bommai v Union of India (1994):[8] A 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that ‘Secularism’ is a part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution, which cannot be amended by the Parliament under Article 368[9]. They also held that if a state government acts in a non-secular way, then it can be dismissed under Article 356[10]. Thus, the State must maintain a neutral attitude towards all religions.
Bijoe Emmanuel v State of Kerala (1986):[11] Three children from a Jehovah’s Witness family refused to sing the Indian National Anthem at school as their religion prohibited it. A 3-judge bench of the Supreme Court upheld the children’s right to religious freedom under Article 25 of the Constitution. It emphasised that freedom of conscience and religion includes the right to act or not act in accordance with one’s religion.
Indian Young Lawyers Association v State of Kerala(2018):[12] Also known as the Sabarimala Case, the Sabarimala Temple traditionally prohibited women of menstruating age from entering the temple, citing religious customs. The Court ruled that this exclusive practice was not an essential religious practice. A 5-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that it violated Articles 14, 15, and 25. The court ruled that women of all ages have the right to enter the temple. This verdict demonstrates the conflict between essential religious practices and constitutional morality. Thus, the Court held that freedom of religion cannot violate equality and other fundamental rights.
Everyday Examples: Everyday examples of secularism in India are as follows-
- Holidays on every festival, irrespective of religion, in schools, colleges, or at work.
- Entrance to Temples, Gurudwara or Dargah, irrespective of your religion.
- Providing patients with food that adheres to their religious dietary restrictions in the State hospital.
- Government identities do not ask for religion.
CONCLUSION
According to our Constitution, India is a secular country; its model of secularism, marked by the State’s positive engagement with religion in order to ensure public order, health or morality, remains contested and continuously negotiated. Indian secularism has become an evolving concept due to the state’s regulation rather than an absolute one. We have acquired a unique model, ‘Principled Distance,’ to regulate secularism in India. It helps to accommodate all the diverse religions and beliefs into a single umbrella framework. Also, to keep in mind, secularism depends upon the society’s understanding and tolerance, as recognised in S.R. Bommai v Union of India[13], where secularism was defined as a foundational constitutional value for harmony. Thus, Article 25 of the Indian Constitution plays a key role in maintaining secularism in India. After reading this blog, what do you think about India being truly secular?
Author’s Name: Sumaila Shamshad (Brainware University, Kolkata)
References:
[1] The Constitution of India 1950, art 25
[2] Ibid
[3] ‘Understanding Secularism in the Indian Context’ (Sociology Institute, 16 January 2023) <https://sociology.institute/sociology-in-india/understanding-secularism-indian-context/#google_vignette> accessed 4 December 2025
[4] Constitution of India, 1950, arts 14, 15, 25-28.
[5] Rajeev Bhargava, ‘The Distinctiveness of Indian Secularism’ (Scribd, 2006) <https://www.scribd.com/document/810668903/Bhargava-The-Distinctiveness-of-Indian-Secularism> accessed 03 February 2026
[6] Donald E Smith, India as a Secular State (Princeton University Press 1963)
[7] Shatakshi, ‘Partha Chatterjee’s Account of Secularism and Religion as Faith’ (2024) 4(4) International Journal of Humanities Social Science and Management 648 <https://ijhssm.org/issue_dcp/Partha%20Chatterjee%20s%20account%20of%20secularism%20and%20religion%20as%20faith.pdf> accessed 3 February 2026
[8] S. R. Bommai v Union of India (1994) 3 SCC 1
[9] Constitution of India 1950, art 368
[10] Constitution of India 1950, art 356
[11] Bijoe Emmanuel v State of Kerala (1986) 3 SCC 615
[12] Indian Young Lawyers Association v State of Kerala (Sabarimala Case) (2018) 16 SCC 417
[13] S R Bommai v Union of India (1994) 3 SCC 1
