The prescription of dress code for All India Pre-Medical Entrance Test-2016 is questioned in this writ petition. The first petitioner is a candidate appearing for the entrance test. The 2nd petitioner is the father of the first petitioner.

2. The parties profess Islam by faith. They challenge the prescription of the dress code on the ground of violation of fundamental right as guaranteed under Article 25(1) of the Constitution.

3. The Central Board of Secondary Education (Board) has been entrusted with the task of the conduct of Pre-Medical Entrance Test. In the wake of large-scale malpractices in the entrance test during the previous years, the Board decided to prescribe the dress code. It has been noted that various methods have been adopted by the candidates for copying. It appears that there were instances of taking electronic gadgets underneath the dress. These ingenious practices adopted by the candidates even resulted in cancellation of the examination earlier conducted, by the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, in order to ensure credibility and transparency in the examination, the Board prescribed the following dress code.

"Dress Code

The candidates are instructed to follow the following dress code while appearing for AIPMT-2016.

(a) Light clothes with half sleeves not having big buttons, brooch/badge, flower, etc. with Salwar/Trouser.

(b) Slippers and not the shoes."

4. The petitioners would submit that the dress code prescribed as above would offend the religious prescription of the dress code, prescribed for women in Islam and therefore, this would negate the fundamental right as guaranteed under Article 25(1) of the Constitution of India.

5. In the country like India, a predominantly religious society, the Court will have to examine the religious freedom in the light of constitutional scheme. The religious freedom to profess, practice and propagate is a fundamental right, subject to public order, morality and health as provided under Article 25(1) of the Constitution. There are occasions in the matter of public affairs or related secular activities, leading to instances of conflict between religious practices and the State interest. Essentially, this conflict veers around religious practices rather to freedom of conscience, The Courts are often called upon to decide the question of conflict between the right to religious freedom and the State's duty to regulate public affairs in matters of general nature or secular activities. Therefore, the individual's religious rights when entangled in public law have to be resolved by the Court by assimilating individual rights and the State interest.

6. India is a secular State and secularism is its constitutional goal. Secularism is part of the basic structure of the Constitution. {See the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.R. Bommai & others vs. Union of India & others [(1994) 3 SCC (1)]}. Article 25(1), while allowing the freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice and propagate religion, reserves the State's right to interfere with the religious matters, if it involves an issue relating to public order, morality and health. Article 25(2) also enjoins the State legislative power to make regulations or restrictions on any economic, financial, political or other secular activities associated with religious practice. Article 25(2) of the Constitution, in fact, creates a dichotomy between religious affairs and secular activities which may be associated with religious practices. The Constitution makers were conscious about characteristics of the religions prevalent in India. The religion covers every aspect of life, from birth to death. However, constitutional philosophy is to have a separation of secular activities associated with the religious practices. Article 25(2) clearly alludes to the underlying philosophy as above. The State is not immune from making legislation in relation to economic, financial, political or other secular activities