The Indian Secular Experiment.

India was never a secular country. But neither was it communal. For a country, where partition (based on religion) was the price it had to pay for its Freedom, it was very difficult for the architects of modern day India to make a constitution that was religion indifferent. But it was better done,than said. Religion was kept out of the governing principles and state followed a neutral, no favor policy towards all religion, as an attempt to safeguard its future against the odd that it had just witnessed. India threw off the cloak of imperial legacy to became world’s largest democracy. The newly formed constitution ensured that the interests of its citizen were safeguarded equally.

But this was detrimental to the growth of the political agenda and dynastic Politics. A democratically united India shall not let itself be ruled by a crown again. But what if, the crown championed a representative cause.  And with the 42^nd amendment act, the cause was born. India constitutionally declared itself a Secular country and Secularism as de-facto state religion. Indian secular experiment had just begun!
 The process of secularizing state should have typically involved granting religious freedom, disestablishing state religions, stopping public funds to be used for a religion, freeing the legal system from religious control, freeing up the education system, tolerating citizens who change religion or abstain from religion, and allowing political leadership to come to power regardless of religious beliefs.

As noted by historian Ronald Inden, Indian government is not really "secular", but one that selectively discriminates against Hindu communities while superficially appeasing Muslim leaders (without actually providing any community or theological benefits to regular Muslims in India). He writes that poorly educated Indian so-called "intelligentsia" identify Indian "secularism" with anti-Hinduism.

A point in case would be Hindu religious and Charitable endowment Act, which provides full power to state in the matters of management of temple and administration of its endowments. Why should a constitutionally SECULAR state, concern itself with the management of a religious institution and utilization of the funds received through donations. And, if so, why only temples? The huge amount of money donated by the doting Hindus, to the temple, is taken away by the SECULAR state to fund the HAJ subsidy. (It is note-worthy to mention that India being the only country on this Earth to provide HAJ Subsidy)

The great SECULAR state of India, which constitutionally guarantees non discrimination of its citizen, discriminates them legally. While the champions of Secularism will never draw your attention to it, but secular India favors a communal law. The absence of a Universal Civil Code and existence of a Muslim Personal Law, points to a flawed secular structure. Why should a secular state have communal laws. Should not the guiding principles of the constitution be legally binding? While existence of such aberrations help in forwarding the political agenda of appeasement, the real sufferer are the citizens’ e.g. Shah Bano. But the secular experiment continues.

Another, striking aspect of practice of Secularism in India is absence of mention of smaller religious minorities, like Buddhists, Janis, Parsees etc. The secular argument for justification of “consideration” for religious minorities (read Muslims), is never evoked for others. Is it because, the other religious minorities not being in considerable numbers, cannot contribute to the vote bank substantially?

Political rallies and election campaign have become the testing grounds of SECULAR theory. The  recently conducted U.P election was witness to some of the most excruciating challenges put forward to a democracy. Promises of escalating religion based reservation, politicization of terrorism (Batla house encounter), to wearing skull caps, every SECULAR trick in the bag, was tried. The argument is not as much against the political gimmickry as against the superficial appeasement policy followed by the so called SECULAR parties. While these parties organize the biggest Iftar, in the town, there is a conspicuous absent of any Holi Milan Samaroh.

While infinite such aberrations like Introduction of Communal Violence Bill, elimination of Madrassa from RTE, non recognition of Ram Sethu etc can be listed, the only point that I wish to emphasize here is that though being a “numeric majority”, Hindus suffer from a Secular Bias.The state’s policy of secularism is flawed and opportunist. The only purpose that a constitutionally conferred status of Secularism serves, is to provide an umbrella protection to the politico-religio chauvinism. 

India would have to set aside centuries of traditional religious ignorance and superstition and eventually eliminate religion as a factor from the architecture of its policy making. Unless the ruling class, sets aside its political agenda, and stops looking at INDIANS as vote bank, the Indian Secular Experiment is here to continue