Religious Law & Crime


Religion is the very basis of human life, which is not necessarily an ideology but is also a way of living in the fact’s light that the devotees of a specific religion seek an unequivocal job and with this ethical responsibility to obey those principles, religion comes within the limits of the law that an individual is compelled to obey or not to interfere the guidelines specified by a State (e.g. any nation). Therefore, it is evident that the law and religion are subject to each other because individuals will inevitably follow religious duties before the concept of a system of state or majority rules and should guarantee religious rights. According to these points, therefore, religion undertook a fundamental task of preserving legality in unfamiliar areas of the globe in ancient social orders.

The world’s legal history is an example of how the law progressed in various regions of the globe except for religion, how the advancement of law differed in different regions, such as Islamic Law, Roman Law, Christian Law, and then I will emphasise on the growth and progress of Hindu Law in India. I will address how the Hindu Law as a way of life has impacted the advancement of law and how it has contributed to the creation of individual laws for each religion in India, and who are the individuals in the public realm governed by Hindu Law.

In addition, I will discuss what are the outpourings of Hindu Law and how the Hindu Law is still essential in the innovative world by obtaining help from the present world’s latest wellsprings. Religions hatred is an act of aggression between diverse religions. Like we have a prejudice that implies upon the ethnicity of others. The spread of religious hatred is nowadays ordinary. This can may well be like online network according to any mean. There have been several instances in India where religious indifference is converted into religious violence. Savagery against Muslims is on the increase in India or in the northeast. Online networking is a method for conveying a message to others. However, a few people misuse this web-based life by expressing their contempt for other religions. In a society such as this where meetings are divided on the basis of faith leads to greater disdain for others.

In the Religious Wars, India ranked only marginally better than Syria. After Syria, Nigeria and Iraq, India ranked fourth on the globe in 2015 in terms of social challenges, including religion. The impedance of government and community submission to religion in India is high and rising every year. Government restriction of religious expression in India has been mostly orchestrated with minorities. Across India, individuals may usually be more religious than some other nations. Individual people of India is so affiliated to religion that now and then they can absolute disgrace various religions. Antagonising some other religion and implying contempt to other religion is frequent in India. For that administration needs to collude in the midpoint. The government gave discipline in an attempt to eliminate religious intolerance. The aim of this study stipulates the relationship between religious law and religious crime with different Case laws.

Review of Literature

India is a nation of spiritual decent variety and religious resilience is established in both law and custom. Since the resumption of India, religion has become a major aspect of the country’s style of living. A dominant portion of Indians collaborate themselves with a religion. Indian enumeration has accumulated that Hinduism denotes 80.5% of the number of inhabitants in India. The second largest religion is Islam, at almost 13.4% of the citizenry. Christianity is the third largest religion at 2.3 percent. The fourth biggest religion is Sikhism at about 1.9 percent of the population of India. This diversity of religious conviction structures leaving in India today is a consequence of, besides the existence and birth of local religions, uptake and social joining of religions brought to the region by dealers, voyagers, labourers, and even invaders and champions. Conveying the inclusiveness of Hinduism towards every single other religion, John Hardon expresses, “Be which is as it should, the most notable element of existing Hinduism is its creation of a non-Hindu State, in which all religious groups are fair

Many different local Indian religious groups are Buddhism and Jainism. Antediluvian India had different theoretical storms of the proposition, the Shramana religions and the Vedic religion, simultaneous exhibitions that have prevailed next with each other for a vast number of years. All Buddhism and Jainism are the progressions of Shramana traditions, while the existing Hinduism is the continuity of the Vedic tradition. These current customs have been dominant. Zoroastrianism and Judaism have an ancient history in India and also some a few thousand Indian disciples.

India’s religious sustainability extends out to the most abnormal amounts of government. The Constitution of India pronounces the nation to be a common democratic state that it must preserve the privilege of native people to openly adore and elicit any religion or confidence (with exercises subject to sensible constraints for ethical quality, tranquillity, and so on). India’s Constitution proclaims the freedom of privileges for religion as an integral right.

Alongside residential affiliations, universal human rights associations, for instance, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch allocate reports on demonstrations of religious savagery in India. More than 2005 to 2009 timeframe, a standard of 130 individuals kicked the bucket every year from collaborative cruelty, or around 0.01 passing’s per 100,000 population. The Maharashtra union disclosed the most shocking of all the casualties affiliated with religious viciousness over the five-year time period, while Madhya Pradesh encountered the highest casualty rate per 100,000 populace somewhere in the 2005 and 2009 period . Over 2012, an aggregate of 97 people moved throughout India from various rebellions regarding religious violence.

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom configured India as Tier-2 in oppressing minority religions, analogous with that of Iraq and Egypt. In a 2018 report, USCIRF prosecuted Hindu nationalist bunches for their battle to “Saffronize” India through malevolence, brutalizing, and pestering against non-Hindus and Hindu Dalit’s. Approximately 33% of state legislatures enforced hostile to alter or potential conflict to bovine butchering legislation against non-Hindus, and hordes inhabited with cruelty against Muslims or Dalit’s whose families have been inhabited with the milk products, cowhide, or hamburger transactions for generations, and against Christians for conversion. “Cow assurance” behead crowds slaughtered.

Punishment towards the Religious crime

  1. Section 153A of Indian Penal Code

Section 153A of the IPC states that anyone who encourages antagonism between people of different religions and acts derogatory to the maintenance of harmonious relationship will face sentencing. Whoever

  • Either spoken or written words or indications or visual symbols and or encourages religious conflict or perceptions of enmity or animosity, distrust or ill-will between various religious groups. Or
  • Any act which is deleterious to the maintenance of harmonious relationship between various religions and which infuriates or is likely to jeopardize public calmness shall be punished with imprisonment of up to 3 years or with a fine or even both.
  • Section 66A of IT Act

Section 66A of the IT act which provides for punishment for exchanging texts of abuse or injury through telecommunication services, etc.Any person who sends out any information that isobjectionable or any information that he understands to be untrue, but for the intent of causing exasperation, inconvenience, potential harm, barrier, ridicule, injury, criminal menace, antagonism, hatred or ill-will, by persistent use of such a computer system or network or electronic system. This portion is only applicable through networking platforms such as social media. This section provides for a sentence of imprisonment for a period of up to three years and a fine.

That provision, however, is overturned by the Supreme Court as thisSection has been unconstitutional. Section 66A of the IT Act was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2015. The court ruled that Section 66A of the IT Act had been “accessible, unspecified, inappropriate and ambiguous”

  • Section 298 of Indian Penal Code

Any person who mouths words and so on with a deliberate intention to hurt any individual’s religious sentiments will be prosecuted under this clause.Whoever, with the explicit intent ofwounding the religious sentiments of any person, enunciates any word or tends to make any sound in the listening of that person or makes any motion in the sight of that individual or places, any artifact in the contact of that person, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either depiction for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or even with both.

  • Section 295A of Indian Penal Code

Section 295A is intended for intentional and malevolent acts intended to incite religious sentiments of any class by insulting their religions and religious beliefs.

Whoever, with a conscious and deceptive intention of exaggerating the religious feelings of any class of Indian people by expressions, signs or noticeable symbols, insults to attempts to offend the religions or religious beliefs of that class shall be punished with imprisonment for a period of up to three years or a fineor even both.

This provision was incorporated in 1927 to safeguard the spiritual belief that was hurt by a published book called “Rangila Rasul.” The book included the marriage life of Prophet Muhammad. There was no clause against offending faith, so the publication has been released. Yet later the publisher was murdered by Ilm-ud-din. The assassin was honored and called Shaheed. The Indian Muslim has called for a provision against offending religious sentiments. Section 295A was then adopted by the Government.

Further, this clause was asserted statutorily legitimate through ‘RamjiLal Modi v State of Uttar Pradesh’[1]; a five-judge bench of the Supreme court determined its constitutional validity under Article 19. That implies it now for making it unlawful, a seven-judge bench is mandated. To make it unconstitutional means that you should have a strong and exciting reason to do so.

Myth of Religious Crimes

It is imprudent to try to distinguish between “religious crime” and “secular crime” as distinct classes. The idea that religion has a role to play in promoting criminal act and criminal activity is part of the conventional intellect of Western societies and it underlies many of our institutions and policies from constraints on the public position to encourage progressive democracy in the Middle East.Religion is not an unified and trans-historical occurrence. What qualifies as “religious” or “secular” in any perspective is a component of architectures of authority both in the West and lands assimilated by the West. The distinctions of “Religious / Secular” and “Religious / Political” are contemporary western inventions.

  • The innovation of the concept of “religious crime” helps the West to strengthen the supremacy of Western social directives over “non-secular” social orders, namely Muslims at the date of publishing.
  • The definition of “religious crime” is being used to justify crimes against non-Western “others.”
  • Peace depends on a balanced approach to crime and recognition of the so-called secular ideologies andInstitutions may be as susceptible to absolutism,the division, and the irrationality.

All cases of crime, aggression and conflict have social , political and economic aspects. As there is no consensus among scholars on meanings of “religion” and no way to isolate them”Religion” from the rest of the more likely motivational aspects, it is incorrect to mark any violent incident as “political.”European wars of religion indicate that people of the same religions battled each other and that people of different religions were allies in these conflicts; the reason for these conflicts was not faith. That is the wars of religion came to an end after rulers consented to pursue their religions, which means that conflicts were more linked to political influence than to people’s religious views.Religious wars such as in the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, as well as the European religious wars were political disputes at the root, doesn’t seemed religious ones. Persons of different faiths have often been friends and have not fought each other in a clear manner.Religion apparently started during the modernity. To be seen as an individualistic and private thing, and that modern secular ideals such as equality of all human beings, intellectual and political liberty, have historically been promoted in the religious language of the past.

Anthropologist Jack David Eller suggests that religion is not inherently evil, arguing that “religion and violence are correlated, but they are not similar. “Necessary or unique to religion”  and“that  virtually any religious abuse has its non-religious implication.”He argues that religion “can be more a symbol of opposing classes than a bone of contention between them. Historians such as Jonathan Kirsch have established links in between European Inquisitions. Stalin’s persecutions in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, McCarthy’s blacklists, and other political incidents were the same form of phenomena as the Inquisitions.

Case Laws

  1. Ram Lal Modi v. State of Uttar Pradesh[1]

Where, while maintaining the constitutionality of that section, the Apex Court held that the snide remarks to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without even any intention or malicious intent to offend the religious sentiments of that class did not fall within the scope of that section,Therefore, disrespect or attempt at an insult the religions and religious faith when produced with a specific intent, which must be intentional or deceitful, of ridiculing the religious sentiments of a group of citizens of India, then only the provisions of Section 295A would be impressed.

  • Jayamala v. State of Kerala[2]

Section 468 of the Code sets out the restriction term of O.P(Crl.)No.1332 of 2011 for any of the offenses referred to therein. The offense under Section 295A of the IPC is punishable by imprisonment of up to three years (while the offense under Section 295 of the IPC is punishable by imprisonment of up to two years).Since the plot is supposed to have existed in the commission of as an offense under Section 295A of the IPC, the penalty for an offense under Section 120B must be the same as the main offence, i.e. Section 295A of the IPC. Consequently, the punishment that may be levied for an offense underSection 120B is imprisonment of up to three years.


India is a multicultural country, and everyone has the ideal of living and rehearsing their own. Religion uninhibitedly, “On the off chance that these instances will not be halted, they will prompt turmoil. They can be stopped, but this takes the political will that the decision-making administration wants. Activists trust the deployment of a helpline to help the exploited people. Access to a legal response.The issues are looting religious minorities in India. To ensure that everyone appreciates the privilege of religious opportunity or belief, Indian needs are prepared to react in a dire and far-reaching way. Proceedings of religiously roused savagery or violence political minorities will be thoroughly investigated and those responsible brought to justice. Casualties of these barbarities should be provided with help. To give full impact on India’s global legal obligations, the counter-transformation laws should be repealed.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

  • What is considered as Religious Crime?
  • What are the various laws about Religious Crimes?
  • What cases are of this issue?


[1]1957 AIR 620, 1957 SCR 860

[2]1957 AIR 620, 1957 SCR 860

[3]O.P(Crl.) No.1332 of 2011

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *