KSLU Solved Question Papers
Constitutional Law I
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 3
2012 Jan Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 3 Constitutional Law I 2012 Jan Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2012 Jan examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2012 Jan examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2012 Jan examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 20 questions answered
Instructions printed on the paper
- N.B. (1) Answer all five questions. (2) One essay type and one short note question or problem from each Unit have to be attempted, which is referred as part (a) and (b) in all the Units. (3) Figures to the right indicate marks. (4) Answers should be written either in English or in Kannada completely.
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1
Unit I
(a)With reference to decided cases explain the scope of the fundamental right to freedom of religion under the Indian Constitution.[15]
Answer
For full marks, cover: the Indian idea of secularism (S.R. Bommai); article 25 (scope, persons protected, the four freedoms, the limits, clause (2)); the meaning of religion and the essential practices test with its criticism; article 26 and denominational rights; articles 27 and 28; decided cases arranged by theme (meaning of religion, regulation of secular activity, conversion, social reform and temple entry, excommunication, personal law); a summary table; a conclusion.
Secularism: the background
India is a secular State. The word "secular" was added to the Preamble in 1976, but the idea was present from 1950 in articles 14, 15, 16 and 25 to 28. Indian secularism does not mean that the State is hostile to religion, or that there is a wall between them as in the United States. It means that the State has no religion of its own and treats all religions with equal respect. It does not discriminate on the ground of religion.
S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, (1994) 3 SCC 1. Nine judges held that secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution. In matters of State, religion has no place. A State Government that acts against secularism may be dismissed under article 356.
Article 25: freedom of conscience and of religion
Article 25(1) reads: "Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion."
The right belongs to all persons, citizens and non-citizens alike. It has four parts.
- Conscience: the inner freedom to believe in any religion, or in none.
- Profession: the open declaration of one's faith.
- Practice: the performance of rituals, ceremonies and modes of worship.
- Propagation: the spreading of one's religion by explaining its tenets.
Explanation I to article 25 says that wearing and carrying a kirpan is part of the profession of the Sikh religion.
The limits on article 25
- Public order, morality and health. A practice that disturbs public peace, offends public decency or endangers health may be regulated.
- The other fundamental rights. Religious freedom cannot override articles 14, 15, 17 and 21.
- Article 25(2)(a). The State may regulate or restrict any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice.
- Article 25(2)(b). The State may make laws for social welfare and reform. It may also throw open Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus. For this purpose, "Hindus" includes Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists.
Theme 1: what is religion?
The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt, AIR 1954 SC 282. A Madras law allowed the State to appoint officers to manage religious institutions, and levied a contribution on them. Seven judges held that religion is not necessarily theistic. It includes not only beliefs but rituals, observances, ceremonies and modes of worship, and may extend even to food and dress. What is essential to a religion must be decided by reference to the doctrines of that religion itself. Several provisions of the Act were struck down, and the levy was held to be a tax, not a fee.
Theme 2: essential practices
The courts protect only practices that are essential and integral to a religion. In The Durgah Committee, Ajmer v. Syed Hussain Ali, AIR 1961 SC 1402, the Court noted that some practices spring from superstition and are not essential, so they are not protected. Mohd. Hanif Quareshi v. The State of Bihar was decided on 23 April 1958. The Court held that sacrificing a cow on Bakr Id is not an obligatory part of Islam.
Criticism. The essential practices test asks judges to decide questions of theology, which they are not trained to do. It may freeze a religion in its old form. In Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala, (1986) 3 SCC 615, the Court took a different approach. It asked whether the belief was genuinely and conscientiously held, not whether it seemed reasonable to the judges. It protected Jehovah's Witness children who would not sing the National Anthem.
Theme 3: regulation of secular activity
Ratilal Panachand Gandhi v. The State of Bombay, AIR 1954 SC 388. The Bombay Public Trusts Act 1950 regulated religious trusts. The Court held that the State may register and audit trusts and prevent waste, because these are secular matters. But it cannot appoint its own officer as trustee of a religious institution, or divert trust money to other purposes. Those provisions were struck down.
Theme 4: propagation is not conversion
Rev. Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1977 SC 908. Madhya Pradesh and Orissa made conversion by force, fraud or allurement an offence. The Court upheld the laws. The right to propagate means spreading one's faith by explaining it. It is not a right to convert another person. Every person has equal freedom of conscience, and forced conversion would violate it. The laws were also justified as measures for public order.
Theme 5: social reform and temple entry
Sri Venkataramana Devaru v. State of Mysore, AIR 1958 SC 255. A temple of the Gowda Saraswath Brahmin community claimed the right to exclude other Hindus. The Court reconciled article 26(b) with article 25(2)(b). The temple had to be opened to all Hindus, but certain special ceremonies could be kept for the community.
Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, (2019) 11 SCC 1. Women aged ten to fifty were excluded from the Sabarimala temple. By four to one, the Court held that the exclusion was not an essential practice and was invalid. Larger questions were later referred to a bigger Bench in Kantaru Rajeevaru v. Indian Young Lawyers Association, decided on 14 November 2019.
Theme 6: excommunication and denominations
Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb v. State of Bombay, AIR 1962 SC 853. A Bombay law made excommunication void. The head of the Dawoodi Bohra community challenged it. By a majority, the Court held that excommunication on religious grounds was part of the community's right to manage its religious affairs under article 26(b). The law was void.
Theme 7: personal law
Shayara Bano v. Union of India, (2017) 9 SCC 1. By three to two, instant triple talaq was set aside. One judge held that it was not an essential part of Islam, and two held it was manifestly arbitrary under article 14.
Article 26: rights of religious denominations
A religious denomination is a group with a common faith, a common organisation and a distinctive name. Under article 26 it may:
- establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes;
- manage its own affairs in matters of religion;
- own and acquire property; and
- administer such property in accordance with law.
Article 26 is subject only to public order, morality and health. The right to manage affairs "in matters of religion" cannot be taken away. But the administration of property may be regulated by law.
Articles 27 and 28
Article 27 says no person shall be compelled to pay taxes whose proceeds are specifically used to promote or maintain a particular religion. A fee for services rendered is different from such a tax.
Article 28 forbids religious instruction in institutions wholly maintained out of State funds. In institutions recognised or aided by the State, religious instruction is allowed, but no student may be compelled to attend it without consent. In Ms. Aruna Roy v. Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 3176, the Court held that teaching the common values of all religions is not religious instruction barred by article 28.
Summary
| Theme | Case |
|---|---|
| Meaning of religion | Shirur Mutt |
| Essential practices | Durgah Committee, Hanif Quareshi |
| Sincere belief | Bijoe Emmanuel |
| Theme | Case |
|---|---|
| Secular activity may be regulated | Ratilal |
| No right to convert | Rev. Stainislaus |
| Temple entry and reform | Venkataramana Devaru, Indian Young Lawyers Association |
| Denominational autonomy | Sardar Syedna |
| Secularism as a basic feature | S.R. Bommai |
Conclusion. Articles 25 to 28 guarantee freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practise and propagate religion to every person. They also give denominations autonomy in matters of religion, and protect against religious taxes and compulsory religious instruction. The freedom covers essential practices, not every custom, and does not include a right to convert others. It is subject to public order, morality, health, the other fundamental rights and laws for social reform. Within these limits, the courts have protected religious liberty while keeping the State secular.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 3 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.