Can't force government students to recite Hindu prayers: Chhattisgarh HC
What's the story
The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that students in government schools cannot be compelled to recite Hindu prayers. The judgment was pronounced by Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad while hearing a petition against a June 12 circular from the State School Education Department. The circular had mandated daily recitation of Vedic mantras, including Gayatri Mantra and Saraswati Vandana, along with the recital of the National Anthem and the National Song in all government schools from the new academic session.
Legal challenge
Petitioners challenge circular's constitutional validity
The petitioners, including former Chhattisgarh Waqf Board chairman Abdul Salam Rizvi and social activist Shafique Ahmed, challenged the circular's constitutional validity. They argued it violated secularism principles and fundamental rights under Article 28 of the Constitution. "The mandatory inclusion of Saraswati Vandana, Gayatri Mantra, Guru Mantra and Shanti Mantra amounts to religious instruction and promotion of a particular religion within government schools. Hence the impugned order is unconstitutional," they said.
Court's decision
Petitioners can approach court if any child is forced
During the hearing, the state government told the court that the circular had not yet been implemented. Noting this submission, the court disposed of the petition but gave petitioners liberty to approach again if any child is forced to participate in religious recitations. "There is no issue if students of a particular faith recite Hindu prayers in government schools, but students of other religions shouldn't be coerced to follow it," said Aamir Khan, counsel for petitioners.
Circular details
Other religious activities included in circular
The circular also included other religious activities such as reading biographies of great personalities, reciting Bhojan Mantra during mid-day meals, and Gayatri Mantra and Shanti Mantra before dispersal. The petitioners argued that the circular did not provide an exemption mechanism for students who didn't want to participate in these activities. They claimed it was incompatible with public education's secular character and institutionalizes religious practices of one faith in state-funded educational institutions, thereby violating constitutional guarantees.