Propagation of religion, not forcible conversion, protected by Constitution, says Justice Nagarathna, Pg8

Key Highlights:

• The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, clarified that the Constitution protects the propagation of religion, distinguishing it from forcible conversion.
• Justice B V Nagarathna, part of the nine-judge bench reviewing the Sabarimala verdict, made this observation during the proceedings.
• Solicitor General Tushar Mehta highlighted the drafting history of constitutional provisions on religious freedom, emphasizing the rejection of conversion through force or inducement.
• The Advisory Committee on Fundamental Rights and Minorities, chaired by Sardar Vallabhai Patel, debated and eventually deleted anti-conversion clauses.

Detailed Insights:

• The drafting history reveals concerns about forced and fraudulent conversions, leading to the omission of the word "propagate" from the initial draft of Article VI related to religious freedom.
• K M Munshi's note proposed Article VI, focusing on the freedom to profess and practice religion, but the inclusion of "propagate" was debated.
• The debate on anti-conversion clauses was resolved by recognizing that forced conversion was already an offense under existing law, leaving the matter to the legislature.
• The Supreme Court's observation underscores the importance of individual choice and consent in matters of religion, while safeguarding the right to share and promote one's beliefs peacefully.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Propagation of Religion: The act of spreading and promoting one's religious beliefs and practices.
• Forcible Conversion: The act of converting someone to another religion through coercion, force, or inducement.
• Freedom of Conscience: The right to hold and practice one's beliefs without external interference.