Dt: 2/5/18
Articles-25 and 30 of the Indian Constitution
Dr T.H.Chowdary*
Article-25 of India’s Constitution confers fundamental right for every citizen to profess, practice and propagate one’s faith; that is religion. Hindus do not propagate and convert others whereas Christians (and Muslims) do so. When the draft of their Article was discussed in the Constituent Assembly, there were serious objections from eminent members of the (Consembly) against the third element, namely propagate. Several Christian Church associations even from 1944 onwards have been proclaiming that no Constitution of India would be acceptable to them if it does not guarantee the fundamental right for Christians to evangelise and convert as that is their essential duty in the nature of an injunction from Jesus Christ himself. The Christian members of the Consembly vehemently and stridently demanded for the inclusion of the word, “propagate”.
2. While speaking on this provision, Sri Loknath Misra, an eminent parliamentarian and scholar observed, “….to my mind article 19 (which became Art-25 in the final version of the constitution) is a Charter for Hindu enslavement. I do really feel that this is the most disgraceful article the blackest part of the draft constitution. I beg to submit that I have considered and studied all the constitutional precedents and have not found anywhere, any mention of the word propaganda as a fundamental right relating to religions…propagation of religion brought India into this unfortunate state and India had to be divided into Pakistan and India. If Islam had not come to impose its will on this land, India would have been a perfectly secular state and a homogeneous state. …if you accept religion, you must accept Hinduism as it is practised by an overwhelming majority of the people of India….”
3. Prof K T Shah was another eminent member of the Consembly. He too was opposed to have this fundamental right to propagate religion put in our constitution. While opposing this provision, he moved an amendment which ran, “ provided that no propaganda in favour of any one religion which is calculated to result in change of faith by the induvial affected shall be allowed in any schools or colleges or other educational institutions; in any hospital or asylum or in any other place or institution where persons of a tender age or of unsound mind or body are eligible to be exposed to undue influence from their teachers, nurses or physicians, keepers or guardian or any other person set in authority above them and which is maintained fully or partially from public revenues or is in any way aided or protected by the government of the Union or of any state or public authority therein”.
4. Unfortunately Jawaharlal Nehru was for the fundamental right not only to profess and practise but even to propagate. He smothered all opposition from Congress men and had his way to put this fundamental right to propagate religion. Dr. Ambedkar ’s pleading that this should be in the Directive Principles and not as fundamental right was also opposed by Jawaharlal Nehru. The right to convert Hindus by Christian missionaries which did not exist during the 190 years rule of Christian Briton over India, was foisted upon India by Jawaharlal Nehru.
5. Nehru’s daughter , Indira Gandhi smuggled the words “secularism” and “socialism” into the preamble of the constitution through the 42nd amendment to the constitution during the Emergency ( 1975-1977) when almost all opposition MPs and leaders were put in jail or had to go underground. They left these two words undefined and unexplained. In practice, “secularism” has come to mean anti-Hinduism and appeasement of Muslims and Christians, giving them rights and privileges through Article-30 rights and privileges which do not extend to Hindus, namely the establishment of educational institutions of the choice of the minority religions, without limit and on any subject, a right that is denied to the Hindu majority. The Supreme Court did rule that the right to propagate does not confer the right to convert. The evangelists and “secularists” however hold, that propagation inherently intends to gain converts.
6. The latest demand of Christian groups in Andhra Pradesh for creation of a separate state for Christians (converts) and the riots to back this demand were prophesied by the late Loknath Misra and Prof K.T.Shah among others. The anti-Hindu provision in the Constitution are a shame and are crying for rectification.
(718 words)
END