6. Freedom from Attendance at Religious Instruction — Article 28

This is the 6th post in Constitutional Law-I, Unit 4, and the last of the four posts on the Right to Freedom of Religion — after Article 25 (individual freedom of religion), Article 26 (a denomination's right to manage its own affairs), and Article 27 (freedom from religious taxation), this post covers Article 28, which protects students in educational institutions from being compelled into religious instruction or religious worship.

The Problem This Topic Solves

Education in India is provided through an enormous range of institutions — some entirely funded and run by the State, some run by religious trusts but administered by the State, some merely recognised or aided by the State while privately managed, and some fully private institutions with no State connection at all. A single, one-size-fits-all rule on religious instruction in schools would either be too restrictive (banning a private religious school from teaching its own faith to its own students, which would itself interfere with religious freedom) or too permissive (allowing a State-run, State-funded school to indoctrinate every student, regardless of their own family's beliefs, into one religion). Article 28 solves this by drawing distinctions based on the type and degree of State involvement in the institution, rather than applying one blanket rule to every school.

What Article 28 Says

Article 28 has three clauses, each dealing with a different category of educational institution:

• Clause (1): "No religious instruction shall be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained out of State funds."
• Clause (2): "Nothing in clause (1) shall apply to an educational institution which is administered by the State but has been established under any endowment or trust which requires that religious instruction shall be imparted in such institution."
• Clause (3): "No person attending any educational institution recognised by the State or receiving aid out of State funds shall be required to take part in any religious instruction that may be imparted in such institution or to attend any religious worship that may be conducted in such institution or in any premises attached thereto unless such person or, if such person is a minor, his guardian has given his consent thereto."

Four Categories of Institutions, Four Different Rules

Reading the three clauses together, Article 28 effectively sorts educational institutions into four categories based on their relationship with the State, each with a different rule on religious instruction:

Consent Under Article 28(3) — Whose Consent, and Why It Matters

Article 28(3) does not ban religious instruction or worship in State-recognised or State-aided institutions altogether — it only protects the individual student from being forced to participate. If the student is a minor (which will be true for the overwhelming majority of school students), the consent required is that of the student's guardian, not the minor student personally, recognising that a minor may not yet be in a position to make this choice independently. Importantly, the institution must make participation genuinely optional and non-coercive — a student who has not given (or whose guardian has not given) consent cannot be pressured, penalised, or disadvantaged in any way for opting out.

"Religious Instruction" Has a Narrow, Specific Meaning

Article 28's restriction applies only to "religious instruction" in the narrow sense — teaching the customs, rituals, ceremonies, or ways of worship specific to a particular religion, with the aim of inculcating belief in or practice of that religion. It does not cover the academic, comparative study of religions as a subject of general education, aimed at building tolerance, mutual understanding, and civic values, since that kind of study does not aim to convert a student to any one faith.

Aruna Roy v. Union of India (2002)

• Article 28(1): no religious instruction in institutions wholly maintained out of State funds
• Article 28(2): exception — a State-administered institution established under an endowment/trust that requires religious instruction may still impart it
• Article 28(3): in institutions merely recognised by, or receiving aid from, the State, religious instruction/worship may occur, but no student can be compelled to attend it without their (or, if a minor, their guardian's) consent
• Wholly private institutions with no State recognition, aid, or administration fall entirely outside Article 28's restrictions
• "Religious instruction" under Article 28(1) means teaching the customs, rituals, and practices of a particular religion — it does not cover a general, comparative academic study of religions aimed at promoting values and tolerance (Aruna Roy v. Union of India, 2002)

• The four-category structure of Article 28 mirrors, in the education context, the same underlying principle seen across Articles 25–27 in this unit: the degree of the State's own involvement determines how much the State can regulate or must stay out of religious matters
• Article 28(3)'s consent requirement is a genuine, individual safeguard — it is not satisfied by a school-wide notice or a general assumption of consent; real, affirmative consent (or the guardian's, for a minor) is required before compelling participation
• Aruna Roy also relied on Article 51A (Fundamental Duties) to support the value of comparative religious education — a useful link forward to the Fundamental Duties, which appear later in this subject's syllabus

Looking Ahead — Article 29

Having completed all four posts on the Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25–28), this unit now turns to the Cultural and Educational Rights of minorities. The next post covers Article 29 — the protection of the interests of minorities, particularly their right to conserve their own distinct language, script, and culture.

A Practical Example

Consider three schools in the same town: School A is a fully government-run public school (wholly State-funded); School B is a Christian missionary school established under a church trust decades ago, whose management was later taken over for administration by the State under a special arrangement, with the original trust deed requiring daily Bible instruction; and School C is a private school that receives a State grant-in-aid for part of its running costs but remains privately managed. In School A, no religious instruction of any kind can be imparted (Article 28(1)). In School B, the Bible instruction required by the founding trust can continue even though the State now administers the school, because Article 28(2) creates exactly this exception. In School C, religious instruction or worship may be conducted, but a student whose parents do not consent cannot be compelled to attend it (Article 28(3)) — and if the value-education style comparative study of religions is taught in any of the three schools in the spirit of Aruna Roy, none of them would even need to rely on these exceptions, since that kind of teaching does not count as "religious instruction" at all.

Quick Revision Points

• Article 28(1): no religious instruction in wholly State-funded institutions
• Article 28(2): exception for State-administered institutions founded under a trust requiring religious instruction
• Article 28(3): State-recognised/aided institutions may impart religious instruction/worship, but only with the student's (or minor's guardian's) genuine consent
• Wholly private institutions are outside Article 28 altogether
• "Religious instruction" = teaching a particular religion's customs/rituals/worship; academic, comparative study of religions for promoting values/tolerance is not "religious instruction" and is permitted even in State-funded schools (Aruna Roy v. Union of India, 2002)