Delhi HC Directs Centre To Treat PIL Against Use Of Word ‘Dharma’ For ‘Religion’ In Official Documents As Representation And Pass Speaking Order
|The Delhi High Court today converted a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) urging the government to use the terms "Panth" or "Sampradaya" instead of "Dharma" when referring to religion in official documents such as birth certificates, Aadhaar cards, school certificates, ration cards, driving licenses, and bank accounts as a representation to the Centre.
The PIL, filed by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, also seeks the inclusion of a chapter on "Dharma and Religion" in school curricula to combat religion-based hatred and hate speech.
The Bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the Ministry of Culture, Ministry of Education, and Ministry of Home Affairs to pass speaking order on both the prayers sought by Upadhyay.
Upadhyay’s petition argues that "Dharma" should not be equated with religion, as the two concepts are fundamentally different. According to the plea, “Dharma is non-divisive, non-exclusive, and non-conclusive. Dharma is a quest for understanding the cosmic order of the universe and individual consciousness. In contrast, religion is a spiritual lineage or cult known as ‘Sampradaya,’ which refers to a community."
The PIL further contends that the use of the term “religion” in official documents is a Western concept and does not reflect India’s indigenous understanding of Sanatana Dharma. "Indian culture is rooted in Sanatana Dharma, the eternal law of the universe, which cannot be confined to rigid religious tenets or any 'ism,'" the petition states.
Quoting Mahatma Vidura, the PIL emphasizes the holistic and inclusive nature of Dharma: “Dharma knows no boundaries. Protection of trees is Dharma. Keeping the air, water, and land free from pollution is Dharma, and being the saviour and patron of the well-being of citizens is Dharma. Dharma connects people, creatures, and balances individual duties with others’ rights."
The petitioner contends for the recognition of these distinctions, urging the Centre and the states to use precise terminology when referring to religion in official contexts. Upadhyay’s plea aims to initiate educational reforms that would help promote a clearer understanding of Dharma and religion, ultimately reducing hate speech and religious divisions in society.
Incidentally, the Court also passed a similar order in another PIL filed by him for directions to implement the Uniform Banking Code. The Bench has directed the Ministry of Finance to consult MHA and RBI and pass a speaking order as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 3 months.
The Bench has also granted Upadhyay liberty to approach the Court if not satisfied by the Centre’s direction.
The said petition states, "Immigration rules for Visa are same whether a foreigner comes in Business Class or Economy Class, uses Air India or British Airways and comes from USA or Uganda. Likewise, deposit details in Indian banks, including foreign bank branches for Foreign Exchange Transaction must be in the same format whether it is export payment in a current account or salary, in a savings account or donation, in a charity's current account or service charges payable in YouTuber's accounts."
“Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate [FIRC] must be issued and all international and Indian banks must send the link through SMS to get FIRC automatically in case the foreign exchange is being deposited in the account as converted INR. “Moreover, only a person or company should be permitted to send Indian rupees from one bank account to another bank account inside the territory of India through RTGS, NEFT, and IMPS and international banks should not be allowed to use these domestic banking transactions tools,” the PIL further reads.
Cause Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India