India a ‘melting pot of cultures, civilisations and religions’ says SC

File Photo: Supreme Court of India


The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved orders on pleas challenging the Allahabad High Court judgement declaring the 2004 Uttar Pradesh Board of Madrasa Education Act as unconstitutional and said that India is a “melting pot of cultures, civilisations and religions” and stressed on taking steps to preserve it.

Stating that the State can frame Rules to regulate the functioning of the Madrasas but they can’t be wished away, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud heading a bench also comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Modra said, “Ultimately, we have to see it through the broad sweep of the country. Religious instructions are there not just for the Muslims. It is there in Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Buddhist, etc.”

Stating that India is a religious country, the Chief Justice Chandrachud said, “The country ought to be a melting pot of cultures, civilisations, and religions. Let us preserve it that way. In fact, the answer to ghettoisation is to allow people to come to the mainstream and to allow them to come together. Otherwise, what we essentially would be doing is to keep them in silos.”

Reserving the verdict after hearing arguments that lasted for nearly four hours, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud said that Madrasas were not unique in imparting religious teaching and the same was true of other religions – Christianity, Buddhism, Jews, Jainism, Hindus, Sikhs and others.

The judgment was reserved after hearing arguments by senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Salman Khurshid and Menaka Guruswamy appearing for the petitioners, and the Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government and others. In all there were eight petitioners.

In the course of the hearing, the court reminded the ASG Nataraj that Uttar Pradesh government has to stand by the UP Board of Madrasa Education Act, 2004 and then said that it would treat the reply filed by the State government before the Allahabad High Court as the stand of the State government.

The court told the Uttar Pradesh government that there are provisions in the UP Board of Madrasa Education Act, 2004 that can be taken recourse to regulate the Madrasas and state can frame Rules to regulate their functioning but their existence over a century cannot be wished away.

The court also questioned the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights over its stand on Madrasas.

The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights in its reply before the top court on September 11, 2024, has said that Madrasas are unsuitable to impart quality education to the children attending them as they (Madrasas) not only render an unsatisfactory and insufficient education but also have an arbitrary mode of working which is wholly in absence of a standardized curriculum and functioning.

The NCPCR had said that a Madrasa is not a school as defined under Section 2(n) of the Right To Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) and as such it is an “unsuitable/unfit place to receive ‘proper’ education …” and “It cannot be overlooked that a child getting education in such an Institution will be devoid of basic knowledge of school curriculum which is provided in a school.”

The Allahabad High Court in March this year had declared the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, as unconstitutional, violative of the principle of secularism and the right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the constitution.

Holding that the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madrasa Education Act, 2004, was unconstitutional, the High Court had directed the State government to “take steps forthwith for accommodating the madrasa students in regular schools recognised under the Primary Education Board and schools recognised under the High School and Intermediate Education Board of the state of Uttar Pradesh.”

The High Court verdict had come on a petition by a lawyer who had challenged the Madrasa Act.

However, in April, the Supreme Court had put on hold the High Court’s judgment, saying that the High Court prima facie misconstrued the Act and that the decision would impact nearly 17 lakh students.