Question Details

To maintain the secular character of the Indian polity, not only does the Constitution of India guarantee freedom of religion to individuals and groups, but it is also against the general policy of the Constitution of India that any money be paid out of the public funds for promoting or maintaining any particular religion. Accordingly, it is provided in the Constitution of India that no person shall be compelled to pay any taxes, the proceeds of which are specifically appropriated in payment of expenses for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religious denomination. This does not prohibit the State from enacting a law to incur expenses for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religious denomination, but by such law, no person can be compelled to pay any tax, the proceeds of which are to be so utilized. This, however, does not invalidate levy of a fee to provide some service. Thus, a fee can be levied on pilgrims to a religious fair to meet the expenses of the measures taken to safeguard the health, safety and welfare of the pilgrims. Such fee levied by a State will be valid because the object of such contribution is not to foster or preserve religion, but to control secular administration of religious institutions.


Communal riots between religion ‘A’ and religion ‘B’ resulted in the destruction of places of worship of both religions in a State. As a result, the State government utilized public funds for restoring the places of worship of both religions ‘A’ and ‘B’. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?

Options

A

The State government’s act is violative of the Constitution of India as it is promoting or maintaining particular religions.

B

The State government’s act is not violative of the Constitution of India as it is not promoting or maintaining any particular religion.

C

The State government’s act is violative of freedom of religion as it condones communal violence.

D

The State government’s act is not violative of the Constitution of India as it is promoting or maintaining a particular religion.

Show Answer

Correct Answer :

Option B

The State government’s act is not violative of the Constitution of India as it is not promoting or maintaining any particular religion.

Solution :

Correct Answer: The State government’s act is not violative of the Constitution of India as it is not promoting or maintaining any particular religion.


Step-by-step Explanation:


1. Understanding the Constitutional Principle:
The passage explains that to maintain secularism, public funds and tax revenues should not be used to favor, promote, or maintain any specific religion or religious denomination over others.


2. Analyzing the Scenario:
In the given situation, communal riots led to the destruction of places of worship belonging to both religion ‘A’ and religion ‘B’. The State government utilized public funds to restore the damaged places of worship for both religions equally, rather than favoring one specific religion.


3. Logical Conclusion:
Since the restoration work applies equally to both affected religious communities without preferring or promoting a single religion, the State's action does not constitute promoting or maintaining a particular religion. Therefore, the State government’s act is not violative of the Constitution of India.

Unlock Our Free Library

Access expert-curated educational resources and study materials—completely free.

Ask AI Tutor
5 left
Q1 View Question & Options
AI Tutor is solving this question...
Reading question context & options...