IMPORTANT POINT
Individuals have the constitutional right to change their religion, and official records must be updated to reflect such changes, irrespective of the absence of specific provisions.

JUDGMENT :

V.G. ARUN, J.

1. The petitioners were born to Hindu parents and professed that religion till May, 2017. In the year 2017, the petitioners decided to embrace Christianity and was baptized at the Malankara Catholic Church, Mavelikara. After thus becoming Christians, the petitioners decided to get their religion changed in the school certificate. For that purpose, the petitioners got Ext.P5 notification issued in the Government Gazette. Thereafter, they approached the 2nd respondent seeking to change their name and religion in the school certificate. By Ext.P9, the petitioners’ request for change of name was allowed. But, the prayer for change of religion was rejected on the premise that there is no provision for carrying out such change in the school certificate.

2. Heard, learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on Ext.P10 judgment of this Court, rendered under similar circumstances and contended that, even in the absence of a provision, this Court is vested with ample power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

4. The learned Government Pleader drew attention to reference No. 3 in Ext.P9 to submit that there are Government Orders, which stands in the way of the petitioners’ prayer for change of religion being granted.

5. Even if it is to be accepted that there is no provision enabling change of religion entered in school certificates, that is no reason to tie down a person to one religion, merely by reason of his birth. The freedom to practice and profess any religion of one’s choice is guaranteed by Article 25(1) of the Constitution. If a person embraces another religion by exercising that freedom, necessary corrections will have to be made in his records. As rightly observed in Ext.P10 judgment, refusal to carryout the correction will have an adverse impact on the future of the applicants. Moreover, such rigid approach militates against the Constitutional guarantee also.

6. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is allowed, Ext.P9 is set aside and the 2nd respondent directed to correct the entry regarding religion of the petitioners in Exts.P1 and P2, as requested in Exts.P6 and P7, within one month of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.