Editorial: Madrasas matter

Supreme Court once again demonstrates that secularism means striking a balance between religious and modern education

‘Live and Let Live’ should be the core motto of secularism. India draws its strength from its commitment to secularism and celebration of diversity. By upholding the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, the Supreme Court has once again demonstrated that secularism doesn’t mean the negation of religion but striking a balance between religious and modern education. The 20-year-old Act is intended to regulate, develop and oversee the education provided by madrasas across the State. It offers a curriculum that not only imparts religious instruction but also includes subjects aligned with the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), thus giving students a solid foundation in secular studies. This integration allows madrasa students to pursue further education and professional opportunities, ensuring that they are not confined solely to religious studies but are instead empowered with diverse academic options. The apex court’s ruling has come as a big relief to about 17 lakh students enrolled in over 16,000 madrasas across the State as it clears the hurdles in their path to pursuing both religious and secular education under a legally secure framework. In a landmark decision, the top court unanimously set aside the Allahabad High Court order that scrapped the two-decade-old law earlier this year on the ground that these schools violated the constitutional tenet of secularism. The SC bench, headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, struck a fine balance when it held certain provisions of the Act unconstitutional but refused to scrap the law in its entirety, saying such a move would be akin to “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”

The court held that certain provisions of the Madarsa Act which pertain to the granting of ‘fazil’ and ‘kamil’ degrees beyond class 12 were unconstitutional as they are in conflict with the UGC Act. Overall, the Act was to protect the rights of minorities and was consistent with the positive obligation of the State, which ensures students pass out and earn a decent livelihood. The mere fact that a legislation includes some sort of religious training or instruction does not make it unconstitutional. The SC verdict means that madrasas would continue to function in Uttar Pradesh with the state regulating the education standards. It has sent out a strong message that the rights of minorities will be safeguarded at any cost. Madrasas in the BJP-ruled UP, Assam, Madhya Pradesh and other States have been under threat in recent years. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) wrote to the chief secretaries of all States and union Territories, recommending that madrasa boards be closed down, state funding to the institutions be stopped and the children studying there be enrolled in formal schools. Hopefully, the SC ruling will help in curbing the brazen vilification of madrasas.

---