Preamble of Indian constitution defined India as a Secular democratic country, which means in India state has no religion. In other words it means that each and every religion will be treated equally. In a case Arun rai Vs UOI Supreme court held that the word Secularism has positive meaning. Brajeshwar Prasad from Bihar was the first person to move a motion to introduce secular and socialist in preamble of India which was rejected by the constitutional assembly. As the political scientist Shefali Jha has pointed out, this constitutional dream can be best comprehended from K.M. Munshi's words.
'The non-establishment clause (of the U.S. Constitution),' Munshi wrote, 'was inappropriate to Indian conditions and we had to evolve a characteristically Indian secularism.We are a people with deeply religious moorings. At the same time, we have a living tradition of religious tolerance - the results of the broad outlook of Hinduism that all religions lead to the same god. In view of this situation, our state could not possibly have a state religion, nor could a rigid line be drawn between the state and the church as in the U.S.' Or, as Rajeev Bhargava has explained, what secularism in the Indian setting calls for is the maintenance of a 'principled distance' between state and religion.
This does not mean that the state cannot intervene in religion and its affairs, but that any intervention should be within the limitations prescribed by the Constitution. Sometimes this might even call for differential treatment across religions, which would be valid so long as such differentiation, as Mr. Bhargava explains, can be justified on the grounds that it 'promotes freedom, equality, or any other value integral to secularism.' India is the only country with religious diversities thus various provisions are made in part 3rd of Indian constitution regarding religious freedom. Article 25 to 28 of the constitution of India guarantees the right of Freedom of religion. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion.
Even after all these provision still there is disharmony in various religions. In India people are very much obsessed with their religion, they cannot bear any sort of question or argument on their religion. As we have recently saw opposition of Supreme court's judgment over triple talaq even some women are also opposing this just because they consider it interference in their religion. We have also witnessed violence done by people on the name of GORAKSHA, 28 Indians died over the seven-year period, 24 were Muslim, or 86%. As many as 124 people were also injured in these attacks.
More than half (52%) of these attacks were based on rumours, our analysis found. 2017 on track to be worst-ever year for cow-related violence. On April 1, 2017, 55-year-old Pehlu Khan, a resident of Haryana, was beaten by cow vigilantes in Rajasthan's Alwar district. He succumbed to his injuries in a hospital two days later. In August 2016, in Mewat, Haryana, a woman and her 14-year-old minor cousin were allegedly gang-raped after being accused of eating beef. Two other relatives were murdered.
The woman later denied eating beef. Four men were arrested and charged with rape and murder. These attacks - sometimes collectively referred to as gautankwad, a portmanteau of the Hindi words for cow and terrorism, on social media - were reported from 19 of 29 Indian states, with Uttar Pradesh (10), Haryana (9), Gujarat (6), Karnataka (6), Madhya Pradesh (4), Delhi (4) and Rajasthan (4) reporting the highest number of cases. The way to protect the cow was to die for her, that it was a denial of Hinduism and ahimsa to kill a human being to protect a cow, Mahatma Gandhi also wrote about this experience in his autobiography:
'Here I saw a cow with five feet! I was astonished, but knowing men soon disillusioned me. The poor five-footed cow was a sacrifice to the greed of the wicked. I learned that the fifth foot was nothing else but a foot cut off from a live calf and grafted upon the shoulder of the cow! The result of this double cruelty was exploited to fleece the ignorant of their money. There was no Hindu but would be attracted by a five-footed cow, and no Hindu but would lavish his charity on such a miraculous cow.' Making his stand absolutely clear, Gandhi added, 'Needless to say I have authorized no one to preach vegetarianism as part of non-cooperation. I do not know the persons named above. I am sure that our purpose will be defeated if propaganda of any kind is accompanied by violence. Hindus may not compel Mussulmans to abstain from meat or even beef-eating. Vegetarian Hindus may not compel other Hindus to abstain from fish, flesh or fowl. I would not make India sober at the point of the sword. I have heard that, at big fairs, if a Mussulman is found in possession of cows or even goats, he is at time forcibly dispossessed.
Those, who, claiming to be Hindus, thus resort to violence are enemies of the cow and of Hinduism.' Reinforcing this, he also said that '…To attempt cow protection by violence is to reduce Hinduism to Satanism'. Seventy years later, we are no closer to Gandhi's idea of goseva. On the contrary, the kind of cow protection that he repeatedly warned against is writ large on the political landscape today, the frenzy of cow protectors masquerading as righteousness and looked upon benignly by governments, no less. Although Article 19 provides for freedom of speech and expression but still in our country people are not even free to make a movie on their will, if they do they have to bear consequences a rampaging anti-'Padmaavat' mob in Haryana's Gurugram attacked school buses taking children home. These people are trying to save a lady of whom they don't even know exist or not by endangering modesty and life of other innocent. They don't even care about the orders of the apex court of the country. In the procession, out of several tableaux, one was dedicated to Shambhu Lal Regar - the man who is in Jodhpur jail for hacking and burning a Muslim labourer. A man, impersonating the murder-accused posed with a pickaxe in his hand and another posed as the victim and lay on the ground.
A flex message hailed the hate crime accused as someone who had tried to fight 'love-jihad'.
The man who is accused of the crime against humanity is getting support. In Support of Shambu Lal Regar, Hindu Groups Unfurl Saffron Flag On Udaipur Court Premises, Attack Police. In a country where one cannot wear any religious mark in apex court, such an incident must be punished seriously. We don't allow any religious outfit or mark in court but allow it in parliament which is another important place for securing religious harmony and to protect the constitution. Mughalsarai Junction railway station is a famous Railway station in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. Its name has been changed to Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Junction on 16 October 2017. All these incidents show that even after so many years of independence we are not able to achieve unity in diversities.
Article 15(4)'Nothing shall prevent the state from making any special provision by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for SC or ST.' This was introduced in 1951 by first amendment. It was initially started for 10 yrs. After the independence of India in 1947 there were some major initiatives in favour of the Scheduled Tribes (ST), Scheduled Castes (SC) and Other Backward Classes (OBC).
A common form of caste discrimination in India was the practice of untouchability. SCs were the primary targets of the practice, which was outlawed by the new Constitution of India.
In 1954, the Ministry of Education suggested that 20 percent of places should be reserved for the SCs and STs in educational institutions with a provision to relax minimum qualifying marks for admission by 5 percent wherever required. In 1982, it was specified that 15 percent and 7.5 percent of vacancies in public sector and government-aided educational institutes should be reserved for the SC and ST candidates, respectively. The system of reservation in India comprises a series of affirmative action measures, such as reserving access to seats in the various legislatures, to government jobs, and to enrolment in higher educational institutions. The societal inequality in India is represented by the grossly inadequate representation of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Castes in employment and education due to historic, societal and cultural reasons. The reservation nourishes the historically disadvantaged castes and tribes, listed as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes by the Government of India. The reservation is undertaken to address the historic oppression, inequality and discrimination faced by those communities and to give these communities a place. It is intended to realize the promise of equality enshrined in the Constitution. Reservations were started with good intentions- to uplift, educate and empower the SCs, STs and OBCs but unquestionably ended up doing more harm than good. Reservation is governed by constitutional laws, statutory laws, and local rules and regulations. The Scheduled Castes (SC), scheduled tribes (ST) and Other Backward Classes (OBC), and in some states Backward Classes among Muslims under a category called BC(M), are the primary beneficiaries of the reservation policies under the Constitution. The primary objective of the present-day Indian reservation system is to enhance the social and educational status of underprivileged communities and thus improve their lives. The 1992 Supreme Court ruling in the Indra Sawhney case said that reservations in job promotions are "unconstitutional" but allowed its continuation for five years.
In 1995, the 77th amendment to the Constitution was made to amend Article 16 before the five-year period expired to continue with reservations for SC/STs in promotions. It was further modified through the 85th amendment to give the benefit of consequential seniority to SC/ST candidates promoted by reservation.
The 81st amendment was made to the Constitution to permit the government to treat the backlog of reserved vacancies as a separate and distinct group, to which the ceiling of 50 percent did not apply. The 82nd amendment inserted a provision in Article 335 to enable states to give concessions to SC/ST candidates in promotion. Only about 0.6% of scholarships or student aid in India is based on merit. India is the only country where people want to call as backward. It was started with good intention but in present scenario, it has come out as a curse for the development of our country. There must be reservation but on economic basis not caste basis because a person who belongs to general caste but economically weak need to be given an opportunity to grow and also it must not be allowed in each and every field. This is one of the reasons of brain drain when a less deserving person got preference over the more deserving person it not only causes mental cruelty but also leads toward hatred. Also when you got some things easily you would not want to work for it. This quota system is a barrier to the development of backward class as it prevents them to enhance their abilities and also develop a feeling of inferiority. And also even if they are capable people thinks they are not. 2nd April 2018, a day which could not forget a day on which Bharat band is organized by a group claimed to belong from SC/ST against a judgment passed by Supreme court, amending few provision of SC-ST Act. In which many people were killed and properties were destroyed and inspite of preventing this chaos Government chooses to file a review petition to save there vote bank, was it so difficult to fail this protest. Even after so many years of independence, India is still a developing country because of reservation, corruption, caste-based politics. In India, you can commit any offense and move freely but you can not raise question.
-  42 Amendment
-  The Hindu
-  Sayra bano Vs UOI
-  Hindustan times.
-  Experiments with truth
-  Times of India
-  W.e.f. 18-6-1951
-  "Educational Safeguards". Department of Education. Government of India. Archived from the original on 19 June 2009. Retrieved 2011-11-27.
-  (1992)
-  Constitution of India.
-  Subhash Chandra Mahajan Vs State Of Maharashtra.