Article 25 is a fundamental right provision in Part III of the Constitution of India, guaranteeing the Right to Freedom of Religion to all persons, including both citizens and non-citizens. It was adopted on December 6, 1948, after debates in the Constituent Assembly, where concerns about the right to propagate religion facilitating forced conversions were ultimately rejected. The Article was created to establish India's secular and pluralistic framework, ensuring every individual could follow their religious beliefs without coercion.
The provision works by granting all persons the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practise, and propagate religion under Article 25(1). This freedom is not absolute and is subject to public order, morality, and health, and other fundamental rights. Article 25(2) allows the State to make laws for two purposes: first, regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political, or other secular activity associated with religious practice under Article 25(2)(a); and second, providing for social welfare and reform or throwing open Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus under Article 25(2)(b).
The Article includes two key explanations: Explanation I states that the wearing and carrying of kirpans is considered part of the profession of the Sikh religion. Explanation II clarifies that the reference to "Hindus" in Article 25(2)(b) is to be construed as including persons professing the Sikh, Jaina, or Buddhist religions.
Article 25 is connected to Articles 26, 27, and 28, which collectively form the Right to Freedom of Religion. It is also linked to the concept of Secularism, which was explicitly added to the Preamble by the 42nd Amendment Act in 1976. The Supreme Court, in cases like The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v Shri Lakshmindar Tirtha Swamiyar of Shri Shirur Mutt (1954), established that "religion" includes those rituals that are integral to a particular religion, leaving the determination of essential religious practices to the courts. The core text of Article 25 has not been replaced or amended since its adoption, but its interpretation is continually refined by judicial pronouncements, such as the Chhattisgarh High Court's ruling in Badri Prasad Sahu & Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh (2026), which reaffirmed that individuals do not need prior state permission for private prayer meetings.