Abstract
Secularism is a concept that has often been a source of political debate and controversy in India. Its origin, evolution and subsequent developments are always a matter of socio-political significance. Indian variant of secularism as opposed to the western notion, seems to put forward a unique perception which is argued to be more suitable to contemporary Indian scenario. Relying on the studies of Rajeev Bhargava, a renowned Indian political theorist, this paper suggests an analysis of Indian secularism as a distinct theoretical postulation. Ethical secularism and politico-moral secularism are differentiated in light of his studies. Further, depending on the arguments of Dr Shashi Tharoor and Shefali Jha, the idea of pluralism is weighed up with secularism, inferring the dynamicity and flexibility of the former. Defining Secularism and its nuances is equally a judicial exercise as it is a political practice. The debates of the Constituent Assembly reflect the views and intentions of the framers of the Indian Constitution regarding the concept of secularism and its significance for India. The intellectual deliberations they made help us comprehend the collective values we bear and the socio-political concerns that existed then, which made the original manuscript of our Constitution exclude the term secularism. Further, judiciary through its constant interpretations redefined the rationality behind the term in a creative manner. The landmark cases and judicial history is discussed in depth in order to give tangible evidence to the existence of Indian variant of secularism. In conclusion, the study asserts the significance of Indian secularism as a complex and intricate landscape. While the pathways may appear convoluted, they ultimately converge to a single point of existence.
- Introduction
Over the seven decades of independent India, had there been a word, that was constantly debated, dissected and often redefined, over which the demography was simultaneously divided and united, it would be the word “Secularism”. Notwithstanding the fact that it was not present in the original manuscript of Indian Constitution, this term eventually turned out to be the epicentre of many historic cyclones that shivered our political landscape. Indian perspective towards the word secularism is quite unique in many aspects. It is an original concept in its entirety wherein mutual acceptance is the cornerstone, not tolerance. The notion of accepting diverse beliefs, rather than merely tolerating them, is central to the foundation of India’s democratic culture.[1]
The effect of this word and its multiple readings are not just confined to the political scenario but it is equally a question of law. From the debates of constituent assembly onwards to the latest verdicts delivered by the hon’ble apex court we are constantly confronting the evolution and fluidity of this concept. Legislature is no different, the word is still in vogue in parliamentary debates and election campaigns. Every single aspect of the word, including its definition, scope and evolution seems to make a sudden reflex in Indian election diaspora. Remaining as a country that bears the wounds of a partition in terms of religion, it is not a matter of wonder, that the pain sustains generations and is turning eventually to a sense of fear.
This study is an attempt to analyse the nuances associated with the term secularism, its definition, judicial evolution and subsequent developments.
[1] Shashi Tharoor, Why I am a Hindu (1st edn, Aleph Book Company 2018)