Constitution prevents imposing religious beliefs of a person on another, says HC

The Constitution of India does not permit a person to impose his/her religious beliefs on another, and every citizen has the right to follow a religious practice in his/her own ways, the Kerala High Court has ruled.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan issued the order dismissing a petition moved by Abdul Noushad of Kottakkal, who was accused of criticising a Muslim girl through a WhatsApp video for shaking hands with former Finance Minister Thomas Isaac at a public function.

The alleged incident took place when Mr. Isaac visited the college and interacted with students. The Minister had given the girl, a law student, a prize at a public function held at the college.

Mr. Noushad reportedly made a speech in a video alleging that the girl had violated the Shariat law by shaking hands with a non-related person in public and thus committed adultery. The police had booked cases against Mr. Noushad under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code (Wantonly giving provocation, with intent to cause riot) and Section 119 (a) of the Kerala Police Act (for performing any acts or sexual gestures in public places that degrades the dignity of women).

The court held that religious practice was a personal choice of every citizen. Article 25 of the Constitution states that all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, and health. Propagating religion does not mean that religious practice should be imposed on others. Every citizen has a right to freely profess and practice his or her religion, the court noted.

If the prosecution case against Mr. Noushad is correct and proved through cogent evidence, it is a serious matter which will intrude on the personal liberty of the girl student, the court observed.

The Constitution will protect the interest of the “young brave” Muslim girl who came forward to complain that the acts of the petitioner had violated her personal freedom of religious belief. In such situations, it is the duty of society to support her. No religious belief is above the Constitution, and the Constitution is Supreme, the court observed.