Article 28 of Indian Constitution

Article 28 of Indian Constitution: Freedom from Religious Instruction

The Indian Constitution is a remarkable document, balancing the rights of individuals with the needs of a diverse, pluralistic society. Among its many provisions, Article 28 of Indian Constitution stands out as a key pillar of secularism, ensuring that education remains free from religious imposition in certain contexts. For students, legal enthusiasts, or anyone curious about India’s commitment to secular education, understanding Article 28 offers valuable insight into the nation’s legal and cultural framework.

In this extensive guide, we’ll explore every facet of Article 28—its text, meaning, historical context, judicial interpretations, and its role in modern India. We’ll break down its clauses, examine landmark cases, and discuss its implications for educational institutions and religious freedom. By the end, you’ll have a thorough grasp of how Article 28 shapes India’s secular landscape. Let’s begin!

What Is Article 28 of Indian Constitution?

Article 28 falls under Part III of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees Fundamental Rights. Specifically, it addresses “Freedom as to attendance at religious instruction or religious worship in certain educational institutions.” Enacted on November 26, 1949, and effective from January 26, 1950, it reflects India’s commitment to secularism—a core principle added explicitly to the Preamble via the 42nd Amendment in 1976, though inherent from the start.

The full text of Article 28 reads:

  1. Clause (1): “No religious instruction shall be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained out of State funds.”
  2. Clause (2): “Nothing in clause (1) shall apply to an educational institution which is administered by the State but has been established under any endowment or trust which requires that religious instruction shall be imparted in such institution.”
  3. Clause (3): “No person attending any educational institution recognised by the State or receiving aid out of State funds shall be required to take part in any religious instruction that may be imparted in such institution or to attend any religious worship that may be conducted in such institution or in any premises attached thereto unless such person or, if such person is a minor, his guardian has given his consent thereto.”

In essence, Article 28 ensures that state-funded education remains secular while respecting the autonomy of certain institutions and individual choice. Let’s unpack its significance.

The Purpose of Article 28 of Indian Constitution

India is a land of unparalleled diversity, home to numerous religions, languages, and cultures. This diversity necessitated a constitution that protects individual freedoms while fostering unity. Article 28 serves three main purposes:

  1. Upholding Secularism: By prohibiting religious instruction in fully state-funded institutions, it ensures that public education doesn’t favor one religion over others.
  2. Protecting Freedom of Conscience: It safeguards students from being compelled to participate in religious activities against their will.
  3. Balancing Rights: It accommodates institutions founded on religious trusts while ensuring no one is forced into religious practices.

This balance reflects India’s unique brand of secularism—unlike the strict separation of state and religion in Western models, India adopts a “principled distance,” allowing state intervention for social reform while maintaining neutrality.

Breaking Down Article 28: Clause-by-Clause Analysis

Clause 1: No Religious Instruction in Fully State-Funded Institutions

  • What It Means: Educational institutions entirely maintained by state funds cannot provide religious instruction. This applies to government schools, colleges, and universities where the state bears all expenses.
  • Objective: To maintain a secular environment in public education, preventing the state from promoting any religion.
  • Example: A government school in Delhi cannot include mandatory prayers or religious classes in its curriculum.

Clause 2: Exception for Trust-Based Institutions

  • What It Means: If an institution is administered by the state but was established under a trust or endowment mandating religious instruction, Clause 1 doesn’t apply. Such institutions can teach religion as per their founding principles.
  • Objective: To respect historical and cultural legacies of institutions while allowing state oversight.
  • Example: A state-run school founded by a religious trust requiring Islamic teachings can offer such instruction legally.

Clause 3: Consent-Based Participation

  • What It Means: In institutions recognized by the state or receiving state aid (but not wholly maintained by it), students cannot be forced to attend religious instruction or worship without their consent—or their guardian’s, if they’re minors.
  • Objective: To protect individual freedom of conscience and religion.
  • Example: A private school receiving government aid can hold a prayer session, but a student can opt out unless they or their parents agree.

Historical Context of Article 28

Constituent Assembly Debates

Article 28 emerged from Draft Article 22, debated on December 7, 1948, in the Constituent Assembly. The framers faced a delicate task: ensuring secular education without alienating India’s religious communities. Key points from the debates:

  • Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s Rationale: As the Drafting Committee Chairman, Ambedkar argued against religious instruction in state-funded institutions for three reasons:
    1. It violated Article 27 (prohibiting taxes for promoting religion).
    2. India’s religious diversity made it impractical to cater to all faiths.
    3. Conflicting teachings could spark tensions in educational spaces.
  • Opposition Views: Some members, like Lokanath Misra, felt banning religious instruction ignored India’s spiritual heritage. Others argued that optional religious education wouldn’t harm secularism.
  • Final Outcome: The Assembly adopted a compromise—prohibiting mandatory religious instruction in state-funded schools while allowing exceptions for trusts and voluntary participation.

Post-Independence Context

When India became a republic in 1950, it inherited a colonial education system often influenced by missionary schools. Article 28 aimed to secularize public education while respecting private religious institutions, aligning with the vision of a pluralistic, secular state.

Article 28 in the Broader Framework of Religious Freedom

Article 28 is part of a quartet of provisions (Articles 25–28) guaranteeing the Right to Freedom of Religion under Fundamental Rights:

  • Article 25: Freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion.
  • Article 26: Freedom to manage religious affairs.
  • Article 27: Freedom from taxes promoting any religion.
  • Article 28: Freedom from compulsory religious instruction in certain educational settings.

Together, these articles ensure that individuals and religious groups enjoy autonomy while the state remains neutral, a cornerstone of India’s secular fabric.

Judicial Interpretations of Article 28

The judiciary has played a pivotal role in clarifying Article 28’s scope through landmark cases. Here are some key rulings:

1. D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab (1971)

  • Background: The Punjab government mandated the study of Guru Nanak’s life and teachings at Guru Nanak University, a state-funded institution. Petitioners claimed this violated Article 28(1).
  • Ruling: The Supreme Court held that academic study of religious figures or teachings isn’t “religious instruction.” It distinguished between scholarly education and proselytizing, upholding the provision.
  • Impact: This clarified that Article 28 prohibits indoctrination, not objective study.

2. Aruna Roy v. Union of India (2002)

  • Background: A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenged the National Curriculum Framework for School Education (NCFSE), alleging it promoted religious content in violation of Article 28.
  • Ruling: The Court ruled that teaching values drawn from religions (e.g., compassion, non-violence) isn’t religious instruction. It emphasized that education promoting universal values aligns with secularism.
  • Impact: Reinforced the distinction between moral education and religious propagation.

3. Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. K.K.R. Majestic Colony Welfare Association (2000)

  • Background: This case indirectly touched on Article 28 by addressing religious activities in educational settings.
  • Ruling: The Court upheld that religious freedom (under Article 25) doesn’t extend to forcing practices on others, aligning with Article 28’s consent principle.
  • Impact: Strengthened the voluntary nature of religious participation.

These cases illustrate how courts interpret Article 28 to balance secular education with religious freedom, ensuring neither is compromised.

Types of Educational Institutions Under Article 28

Article 28 categorizes institutions based on funding and administration:

  1. Wholly State-Funded Institutions:
    • Fully maintained by state funds.
    • No religious instruction allowed (Clause 1).
    • Example: Government schools.
  2. State-Administered Trust Institutions:
    • Managed by the state but founded by trusts requiring religious instruction.
    • Can provide religious teaching (Clause 2).
    • Example: A state-run madrasa under a religious endowment.
  3. State-Recognized Institutions:
    • Private institutions accredited by the state.
    • Can offer religious instruction, but participation is voluntary (Clause 3).
    • Example: A recognized Christian missionary school.
  4. State-Aided Institutions:
    • Private institutions receiving partial state funding.
    • Religious instruction is allowed, but consent is mandatory (Clause 3).
    • Example: A Hindu-aided school receiving government grants.

This classification ensures clarity in applying Article 28 across diverse educational setups.

Article 28 and Secularism in India

India’s secularism differs from Western models. While countries like the U.S. enforce strict separation (no state involvement in religion), India’s approach involves:

  • Neutrality: The state doesn’t favor any religion.
  • Positive Role: It can intervene for social welfare (e.g., temple reforms under Article 25(2)).
  • Pluralism: It accommodates religious diversity.

Article 28 embodies this by prohibiting state-funded religious instruction while allowing exceptions for historical trusts and voluntary participation, striking a pragmatic balance.

Real-World Applications of Article 28

In Government Schools

A public school in Uttar Pradesh, fully funded by the state, cannot include daily prayers or religious classes in its curriculum. This ensures students from Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, or other backgrounds aren’t exposed to a single faith’s teachings.

In Trust-Based Institutions

A state-administered gurukul in Haryana, founded under a trust mandating Vedic education, can teach Hindu scriptures legally under Clause 2, reflecting its founding purpose.

In Aided Private Schools

A Catholic school in Kerala receiving government aid can hold Mass, but a Muslim or atheist student can opt out unless their parents consent, per Clause 3.

These scenarios show how Article 28 operates in practice, safeguarding secularism and choice.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Article 28

Strengths

  • Promotes Secular Education: Keeps public institutions neutral, fostering inclusivity.
  • Protects Individual Rights: Ensures no one is coerced into religious activities.
  • Flexibility: Accommodates trust-based institutions and voluntary participation.

Weaknesses

  • Ambiguity: Terms like “religious instruction” can be subjective, leading to legal disputes.
  • Limited Scope: Applies only to state-funded or aided institutions, not private ones.
  • Implementation Challenges: Enforcement varies across states, sometimes allowing violations.

Article 28 vs. International Standards

Article 28 aligns with global human rights norms, such as:

  • Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948):
    • Article 18: Freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.
    • Article 26: Right to education without discrimination.
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966):
    • Article 18: Freedom from religious coercion.

India’s provision goes further by explicitly addressing educational settings, reflecting its unique socio-religious context.

Contemporary Relevance and Challenges

Modern Debates

  • Curriculum Content: Debates persist over whether moral or value-based education (e.g., yoga, Indian culture) violates Article 28. Courts have clarified these don’t constitute religious instruction.
  • Minority Institutions: Under Article 30, minority-run schools enjoy autonomy, but tensions arise when they receive state aid and face Article 28’s restrictions.
  • Forced Participation: Reports of students being compelled to join religious events in aided schools highlight enforcement gaps.

Technological Impact

Online education raises new questions: Does Article 28 apply to state-funded digital platforms offering religious content? As education evolves, so must its interpretation.

Why Article 28 Matters Today

For students, educators, and policymakers, Article 28 is more than a legal clause—it’s a commitment to equality and freedom. It ensures that:

  • Education remains a unifying force in a diverse nation.
  • Young minds aren’t shaped by state-sponsored religion.
  • Individuals retain agency over their beliefs.

In a time of rising religious polarization, Article 28’s role in fostering tolerance is invaluable.

Conclusion

Article 28 of Indian Constitution is a testament to India’s nuanced approach to secularism and religious freedom. By prohibiting religious instruction in wholly state-funded institutions, allowing exceptions for trust-based schools, and mandating consent for participation, it strikes a delicate balance. Its historical roots, judicial interpretations, and practical applications underscore its enduring relevance.

Whether you’re a law student decoding Fundamental Rights or a citizen curious about India’s constitutional ethos, Article 28 offers a lens into the nation’s soul. What do you think—does it effectively safeguard secular education, or could it adapt further to modern challenges? The conversation continues, much like India’s journey as a secular democracy.

Visited 9 times, 1 visit(s) today