Question Description
Passage:Article 25 guarantees the right to “profess, practice and propagate religion, but also permits the State to regulate „economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice, as well as provide for „social welfare and reform of Hindu religious institutions. Article 26 guarantees religious denominations, among other things, freedom to manage their religious affairs. However, the protection is extended only to the practices considered essential to the religion. The State can still restrict the right on the grounds of public order, health and morality.Litigation around these two Articles has broadly centred on two issues. The first is the distinction between the religious and secular, particularly in the case of Hinduism. The Court has dealt with this by bringing into play an „essential practices test to decide what is essential to Hinduism and used it to distinguish between the sacred and the secular. The Court’s intervention to decide what is religious and what is not in a secular, constitutional culture is hardly peculiar to India. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta points out, in most constitutional settings courts „have to determine whether or not a policy places a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. This might require the court to have not just a definition of religion but also to determine whether a particular practice counts as falling under that definition. What is unusual, however, is the Indian Supreme Court’s activism in fashioning religion in the way the State or the judges would likeit to be, rather than accept religion as practised by believers. The courts have upheld several practices as essential, but not along with the added elements and their outgrowths.(Ronojoy Sen, Secularism and Religious Freedom).Q.A leader of a religious sect, along with a group of volunteers decided to visit the rural parts of India to help those in need. In the process of helping them, he also taught them the basic tenet of his religion. Many residents of the rural area decided to begin following his religion. The leader was arrested under a law that made it illegal to “induce” anyone to convert to a particular religion. The term “induce” is left vague. The Supreme Court has already held, in Stanislaus v. State of MP, that the right to profess and practice religion does not include the right to convert. The leader challenged, in the High Court, the law as violating his right to propagate his religion. His challenge will –a)Fail if he argues that a right to propagate his religion will include the right to convert.b)Succeed if he argues that aright to propagate religion may cause voluntary conversions which are lawful.c)Succeed if he argues that the right to convert is the logical next step to propagating tenets of his religion and should be recognized, as conversions only happen after one is given full information about the other religion.d)Both (b) and (c).Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Passage:Article 25 guarantees the right to “profess, practice and propagate religion, but also permits the State to regulate „economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice, as well as provide for „social welfare and reform of Hindu religious institutions. Article 26 guarantees religious denominations, among other things, freedom to manage their religious affairs. However, the protection is extended only to the practices considered essential to the religion. The State can still restrict the right on the grounds of public order, health and morality.Litigation around these two Articles has broadly centred on two issues. The first is the distinction between the religious and secular, particularly in the case of Hinduism. The Court has dealt with this by bringing into play an „essential practices test to decide what is essential to Hinduism and used it to distinguish between the sacred and the secular. The Court’s intervention to decide what is religious and what is not in a secular, constitutional culture is hardly peculiar to India. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta points out, in most constitutional settings courts „have to determine whether or not a policy places a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. This might require the court to have not just a definition of religion but also to determine whether a particular practice counts as falling under that definition. What is unusual, however, is the Indian Supreme Court’s activism in fashioning religion in the way the State or the judges would likeit to be, rather than accept religion as practised by believers. The courts have upheld several practices as essential, but not along with the added elements and their outgrowths.(Ronojoy Sen, Secularism and Religious Freedom).Q.A leader of a religious sect, along with a group of volunteers decided to visit the rural parts of India to help those in need. In the process of helping them, he also taught them the basic tenet of his religion. Many residents of the rural area decided to begin following his religion. The leader was arrested under a law that made it illegal to “induce” anyone to convert to a particular religion. The term “induce” is left vague. The Supreme Court has already held, in Stanislaus v. State of MP, that the right to profess and practice religion does not include the right to convert. The leader challenged, in the High Court, the law as violating his right to propagate his religion. His challenge will –a)Fail if he argues that a right to propagate his religion will include the right to convert.b)Succeed if he argues that aright to propagate religion may cause voluntary conversions which are lawful.c)Succeed if he argues that the right to convert is the logical next step to propagating tenets of his religion and should be recognized, as conversions only happen after one is given full information about the other religion.d)Both (b) and (c).Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Passage:Article 25 guarantees the right to “profess, practice and propagate religion, but also permits the State to regulate „economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice, as well as provide for „social welfare and reform of Hindu religious institutions. Article 26 guarantees religious denominations, among other things, freedom to manage their religious affairs. However, the protection is extended only to the practices considered essential to the religion. The State can still restrict the right on the grounds of public order, health and morality.Litigation around these two Articles has broadly centred on two issues. The first is the distinction between the religious and secular, particularly in the case of Hinduism. The Court has dealt with this by bringing into play an „essential practices test to decide what is essential to Hinduism and used it to distinguish between the sacred and the secular. The Court’s intervention to decide what is religious and what is not in a secular, constitutional culture is hardly peculiar to India. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta points out, in most constitutional settings courts „have to determine whether or not a policy places a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. This might require the court to have not just a definition of religion but also to determine whether a particular practice counts as falling under that definition. What is unusual, however, is the Indian Supreme Court’s activism in fashioning religion in the way the State or the judges would likeit to be, rather than accept religion as practised by believers. The courts have upheld several practices as essential, but not along with the added elements and their outgrowths.(Ronojoy Sen, Secularism and Religious Freedom).Q.A leader of a religious sect, along with a group of volunteers decided to visit the rural parts of India to help those in need. In the process of helping them, he also taught them the basic tenet of his religion. Many residents of the rural area decided to begin following his religion. The leader was arrested under a law that made it illegal to “induce” anyone to convert to a particular religion. The term “induce” is left vague. The Supreme Court has already held, in Stanislaus v. State of MP, that the right to profess and practice religion does not include the right to convert. The leader challenged, in the High Court, the law as violating his right to propagate his religion. His challenge will –a)Fail if he argues that a right to propagate his religion will include the right to convert.b)Succeed if he argues that aright to propagate religion may cause voluntary conversions which are lawful.c)Succeed if he argues that the right to convert is the logical next step to propagating tenets of his religion and should be recognized, as conversions only happen after one is given full information about the other religion.d)Both (b) and (c).Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Passage:Article 25 guarantees the right to “profess, practice and propagate religion, but also permits the State to regulate „economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice, as well as provide for „social welfare and reform of Hindu religious institutions. Article 26 guarantees religious denominations, among other things, freedom to manage their religious affairs. However, the protection is extended only to the practices considered essential to the religion. The State can still restrict the right on the grounds of public order, health and morality.Litigation around these two Articles has broadly centred on two issues. The first is the distinction between the religious and secular, particularly in the case of Hinduism. The Court has dealt with this by bringing into play an „essential practices test to decide what is essential to Hinduism and used it to distinguish between the sacred and the secular. The Court’s intervention to decide what is religious and what is not in a secular, constitutional culture is hardly peculiar to India. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta points out, in most constitutional settings courts „have to determine whether or not a policy places a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. This might require the court to have not just a definition of religion but also to determine whether a particular practice counts as falling under that definition. What is unusual, however, is the Indian Supreme Court’s activism in fashioning religion in the way the State or the judges would likeit to be, rather than accept religion as practised by believers. The courts have upheld several practices as essential, but not along with the added elements and their outgrowths.(Ronojoy Sen, Secularism and Religious Freedom).Q.A leader of a religious sect, along with a group of volunteers decided to visit the rural parts of India to help those in need. In the process of helping them, he also taught them the basic tenet of his religion. Many residents of the rural area decided to begin following his religion. The leader was arrested under a law that made it illegal to “induce” anyone to convert to a particular religion. The term “induce” is left vague. The Supreme Court has already held, in Stanislaus v. State of MP, that the right to profess and practice religion does not include the right to convert. The leader challenged, in the High Court, the law as violating his right to propagate his religion. His challenge will –a)Fail if he argues that a right to propagate his religion will include the right to convert.b)Succeed if he argues that aright to propagate religion may cause voluntary conversions which are lawful.c)Succeed if he argues that the right to convert is the logical next step to propagating tenets of his religion and should be recognized, as conversions only happen after one is given full information about the other religion.d)Both (b) and (c).Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Passage:Article 25 guarantees the right to “profess, practice and propagate religion, but also permits the State to regulate „economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice, as well as provide for „social welfare and reform of Hindu religious institutions. Article 26 guarantees religious denominations, among other things, freedom to manage their religious affairs. However, the protection is extended only to the practices considered essential to the religion. The State can still restrict the right on the grounds of public order, health and morality.Litigation around these two Articles has broadly centred on two issues. The first is the distinction between the religious and secular, particularly in the case of Hinduism. The Court has dealt with this by bringing into play an „essential practices test to decide what is essential to Hinduism and used it to distinguish between the sacred and the secular. The Court’s intervention to decide what is religious and what is not in a secular, constitutional culture is hardly peculiar to India. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta points out, in most constitutional settings courts „have to determine whether or not a policy places a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. This might require the court to have not just a definition of religion but also to determine whether a particular practice counts as falling under that definition. What is unusual, however, is the Indian Supreme Court’s activism in fashioning religion in the way the State or the judges would likeit to be, rather than accept religion as practised by believers. The courts have upheld several practices as essential, but not along with the added elements and their outgrowths.(Ronojoy Sen, Secularism and Religious Freedom).Q.A leader of a religious sect, along with a group of volunteers decided to visit the rural parts of India to help those in need. In the process of helping them, he also taught them the basic tenet of his religion. Many residents of the rural area decided to begin following his religion. The leader was arrested under a law that made it illegal to “induce” anyone to convert to a particular religion. The term “induce” is left vague. The Supreme Court has already held, in Stanislaus v. State of MP, that the right to profess and practice religion does not include the right to convert. The leader challenged, in the High Court, the law as violating his right to propagate his religion. His challenge will –a)Fail if he argues that a right to propagate his religion will include the right to convert.b)Succeed if he argues that aright to propagate religion may cause voluntary conversions which are lawful.c)Succeed if he argues that the right to convert is the logical next step to propagating tenets of his religion and should be recognized, as conversions only happen after one is given full information about the other religion.d)Both (b) and (c).Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Passage:Article 25 guarantees the right to “profess, practice and propagate religion, but also permits the State to regulate „economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice, as well as provide for „social welfare and reform of Hindu religious institutions. Article 26 guarantees religious denominations, among other things, freedom to manage their religious affairs. However, the protection is extended only to the practices considered essential to the religion. The State can still restrict the right on the grounds of public order, health and morality.Litigation around these two Articles has broadly centred on two issues. The first is the distinction between the religious and secular, particularly in the case of Hinduism. The Court has dealt with this by bringing into play an „essential practices test to decide what is essential to Hinduism and used it to distinguish between the sacred and the secular. The Court’s intervention to decide what is religious and what is not in a secular, constitutional culture is hardly peculiar to India. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta points out, in most constitutional settings courts „have to determine whether or not a policy places a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. This might require the court to have not just a definition of religion but also to determine whether a particular practice counts as falling under that definition. What is unusual, however, is the Indian Supreme Court’s activism in fashioning religion in the way the State or the judges would likeit to be, rather than accept religion as practised by believers. The courts have upheld several practices as essential, but not along with the added elements and their outgrowths.(Ronojoy Sen, Secularism and Religious Freedom).Q.A leader of a religious sect, along with a group of volunteers decided to visit the rural parts of India to help those in need. In the process of helping them, he also taught them the basic tenet of his religion. Many residents of the rural area decided to begin following his religion. The leader was arrested under a law that made it illegal to “induce” anyone to convert to a particular religion. The term “induce” is left vague. The Supreme Court has already held, in Stanislaus v. State of MP, that the right to profess and practice religion does not include the right to convert. The leader challenged, in the High Court, the law as violating his right to propagate his religion. His challenge will –a)Fail if he argues that a right to propagate his religion will include the right to convert.b)Succeed if he argues that aright to propagate religion may cause voluntary conversions which are lawful.c)Succeed if he argues that the right to convert is the logical next step to propagating tenets of his religion and should be recognized, as conversions only happen after one is given full information about the other religion.d)Both (b) and (c).Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Passage:Article 25 guarantees the right to “profess, practice and propagate religion, but also permits the State to regulate „economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice, as well as provide for „social welfare and reform of Hindu religious institutions. Article 26 guarantees religious denominations, among other things, freedom to manage their religious affairs. However, the protection is extended only to the practices considered essential to the religion. The State can still restrict the right on the grounds of public order, health and morality.Litigation around these two Articles has broadly centred on two issues. The first is the distinction between the religious and secular, particularly in the case of Hinduism. The Court has dealt with this by bringing into play an „essential practices test to decide what is essential to Hinduism and used it to distinguish between the sacred and the secular. The Court’s intervention to decide what is religious and what is not in a secular, constitutional culture is hardly peculiar to India. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta points out, in most constitutional settings courts „have to determine whether or not a policy places a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. This might require the court to have not just a definition of religion but also to determine whether a particular practice counts as falling under that definition. What is unusual, however, is the Indian Supreme Court’s activism in fashioning religion in the way the State or the judges would likeit to be, rather than accept religion as practised by believers. The courts have upheld several practices as essential, but not along with the added elements and their outgrowths.(Ronojoy Sen, Secularism and Religious Freedom).Q.A leader of a religious sect, along with a group of volunteers decided to visit the rural parts of India to help those in need. In the process of helping them, he also taught them the basic tenet of his religion. Many residents of the rural area decided to begin following his religion. The leader was arrested under a law that made it illegal to “induce” anyone to convert to a particular religion. The term “induce” is left vague. The Supreme Court has already held, in Stanislaus v. State of MP, that the right to profess and practice religion does not include the right to convert. The leader challenged, in the High Court, the law as violating his right to propagate his religion. His challenge will –a)Fail if he argues that a right to propagate his religion will include the right to convert.b)Succeed if he argues that aright to propagate religion may cause voluntary conversions which are lawful.c)Succeed if he argues that the right to convert is the logical next step to propagating tenets of his religion and should be recognized, as conversions only happen after one is given full information about the other religion.d)Both (b) and (c).Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Passage:Article 25 guarantees the right to “profess, practice and propagate religion, but also permits the State to regulate „economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice, as well as provide for „social welfare and reform of Hindu religious institutions. Article 26 guarantees religious denominations, among other things, freedom to manage their religious affairs. However, the protection is extended only to the practices considered essential to the religion. The State can still restrict the right on the grounds of public order, health and morality.Litigation around these two Articles has broadly centred on two issues. The first is the distinction between the religious and secular, particularly in the case of Hinduism. The Court has dealt with this by bringing into play an „essential practices test to decide what is essential to Hinduism and used it to distinguish between the sacred and the secular. The Court’s intervention to decide what is religious and what is not in a secular, constitutional culture is hardly peculiar to India. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta points out, in most constitutional settings courts „have to determine whether or not a policy places a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. This might require the court to have not just a definition of religion but also to determine whether a particular practice counts as falling under that definition. What is unusual, however, is the Indian Supreme Court’s activism in fashioning religion in the way the State or the judges would likeit to be, rather than accept religion as practised by believers. The courts have upheld several practices as essential, but not along with the added elements and their outgrowths.(Ronojoy Sen, Secularism and Religious Freedom).Q.A leader of a religious sect, along with a group of volunteers decided to visit the rural parts of India to help those in need. In the process of helping them, he also taught them the basic tenet of his religion. Many residents of the rural area decided to begin following his religion. The leader was arrested under a law that made it illegal to “induce” anyone to convert to a particular religion. The term “induce” is left vague. The Supreme Court has already held, in Stanislaus v. State of MP, that the right to profess and practice religion does not include the right to convert. The leader challenged, in the High Court, the law as violating his right to propagate his religion. His challenge will –a)Fail if he argues that a right to propagate his religion will include the right to convert.b)Succeed if he argues that aright to propagate religion may cause voluntary conversions which are lawful.c)Succeed if he argues that the right to convert is the logical next step to propagating tenets of his religion and should be recognized, as conversions only happen after one is given full information about the other religion.d)Both (b) and (c).Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Passage:Article 25 guarantees the right to “profess, practice and propagate religion, but also permits the State to regulate „economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice, as well as provide for „social welfare and reform of Hindu religious institutions. Article 26 guarantees religious denominations, among other things, freedom to manage their religious affairs. However, the protection is extended only to the practices considered essential to the religion. The State can still restrict the right on the grounds of public order, health and morality.Litigation around these two Articles has broadly centred on two issues. The first is the distinction between the religious and secular, particularly in the case of Hinduism. The Court has dealt with this by bringing into play an „essential practices test to decide what is essential to Hinduism and used it to distinguish between the sacred and the secular. The Court’s intervention to decide what is religious and what is not in a secular, constitutional culture is hardly peculiar to India. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta points out, in most constitutional settings courts „have to determine whether or not a policy places a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion. This might require the court to have not just a definition of religion but also to determine whether a particular practice counts as falling under that definition. What is unusual, however, is the Indian Supreme Court’s activism in fashioning religion in the way the State or the judges would likeit to be, rather than accept religion as practised by believers. The courts have upheld several practices as essential, but not along with the added elements and their outgrowths.(Ronojoy Sen, Secularism and Religious Freedom).Q.A leader of a religious sect, along with a group of volunteers decided to visit the rural parts of India to help those in need. In the process of helping them, he also taught them the basic tenet of his religion. Many residents of the rural area decided to begin following his religion. The leader was arrested under a law that made it illegal to “induce” anyone to convert to a particular religion. The term “induce” is left vague. The Supreme Court has already held, in Stanislaus v. State of MP, that the right to profess and practice religion does not include the right to convert. The leader challenged, in the High Court, the law as violating his right to propagate his religion. His challenge will –a)Fail if he argues that a right to propagate his religion will include the right to convert.b)Succeed if he argues that aright to propagate religion may cause voluntary conversions which are lawful.c)Succeed if he argues that the right to convert is the logical next step to propagating tenets of his religion and should be recognized, as conversions only happen after one is given full information about the other religion.d)Both (b) and (c).Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.