Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Hinduism is characterized as a broad and all-pervasive religion, encompassing a wide diversity of beliefs, practices, and worship methods. The Supreme Court described Hinduism as marvellously catholic and elastic, with a theology marked by eclecticism and tolerance, allowing almost unlimited private worship. It is also noted as a way of life rather than a rigid set of doctrines, reflecting its inclusive and diverse nature ["COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX,madras VS R. SRIDHARAN - Supreme Court"].
The term Hindu has a complex etymology and broad connotations. It originally referred to people living in the Indus region, and over time, it came to signify a wide spectrum of communities and beliefs within India. The Court emphasized that Hindu does not denote any particular religion or community but is a title applied to a way of life that includes various beliefs, faiths, and practices ["BAL MUKUND PERSAD GUPTA VS MATHURA PRASAD - Allahabad"] ["V. M. SASI VS KISHORE - Kerala"].
The Court highlighted that Hinduism's diversity includes different sects and practices, with a social code that is more stringent but exhibits wide regional and community-based variations. It also noted that Hinduism has historically absorbed customs and ideas from contact with other cultures, maintaining its relevance and vitality ["COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX,madras VS R. SRIDHARAN - Supreme Court"] ["BAL MUKUND PERSAD GUPTA VS MATHURA PRASAD - Allahabad"].
The judgment clarified that a person is recognized as Hindu if they are born into the Hindu community, conform to Hindu habits and usages, and are accepted as Hindu by society. Conversion to another faith or renunciation of Hinduism requires clear acts of adoption or re-adoption of Hindu practices ["Sapna Jacob VS State of Kerala - Kerala"].
Overall, the Supreme Court in Shastri Yagnapurushdasji v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya emphasized that Hinduism is a broad, flexible, and inclusive way of life, characterized by diversity and tolerance, making it difficult to define precisely but widely recognized as an all-pervasive and fundamental aspect of Indian society ["COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX,madras VS R. SRIDHARAN - Supreme Court"] ["BAL MUKUND PERSAD GUPTA VS MATHURA PRASAD - Allahabad"].
Hinduism, one of the world's oldest traditions, defies simple categorization. Often described not just as a religion but as a comprehensive way of life, its expansive nature has been a focal point in Indian jurisprudence. A pivotal Supreme Court judgment, Shastri Yagnapurushdasji v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya (1966 SCC OnLine SC 198), captures this essence eloquently. But in which paragraph does the Court elaborate that Hinduism is wide and all-pervasive? This blog post delves into that exact reference, its context, and its enduring influence across legal precedents.
Whether you're a law student, legal practitioner, or someone curious about constitutional interpretations of religion, understanding this judgment sheds light on how courts view Hinduism's inclusive character. Let's explore.
The query at hand is straightforward yet profound: In Shastri Yagnapurushdasji v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya, 1966 SCC OnLine SC 198, which paragraph states that Hinduism is wide and all-pervasive? The answer lies in Paragraph 29Hindu Front For Justice Thru. Secy. Ranjana Agnhihotri VS Union of India Thru. Secy. , Secondary & Higher Education - 2016 0 Supreme(All) 932. Here, the Supreme Court articulates the challenges in defining Hinduism, emphasizing its boundless and inclusive qualities.
Paragraph 29 states:
(29). When we think of the Hindu religion, we find it difficult, if not impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it. Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim any one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not follow any one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion or creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more. Hindu Front For Justice Thru. Secy. Ranjana Agnhihotri VS Union of India Thru. Secy. , Secondary & Higher Education - 2016 0 Supreme(All) 932
This passage highlights Hinduism's all-encompassing nature—lacking a single prophet, deity, dogma, or ritual set, yet permeating every aspect of existence. The Court portrays it as a flexible, tolerant system rather than a rigid creed, underscoring its pervasive influence on Indian society. Hindu Front For Justice Thru. Secy. Ranjana Agnhihotri VS Union of India Thru. Secy. , Secondary & Higher Education - 2016 0 Supreme(All) 932
Delivered in 1966 (also reported as AIR 1966 SC 1119), the case addressed whether the Swaminarayan sect constituted a separate religion distinct from Hinduism. The plaintiffs, mahants of the Swaminarayan sect, sought a declaration that their temples were not subject to certain Bombay state legislations applicable to Hindu religious institutions. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice P.B. Gajendragadkar, ruled that Swaminarayan was part of the broader Hindu fold, relying on Hinduism's inclusive definition. Sasi V. M. v. Kishore and Others - 2015 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 41306
Paragraph 29 forms the bedrock of this reasoning, illustrating why sects like Swaminarayan fit within Hinduism's vast umbrella. The judgment traces the etymological origins of Hindu to the Indus River, noting scholarly consensus on its territorial and cultural roots rather than strict religious boundaries. Sasi V. M. v. Kishore and Others - 2015 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 41306STATE VS HINDU HERITAGE RESEARCH FOUNDATION CHARITABLE AND RELIGIONS TRUST - 1992 Supreme(Del) 1
The Shastri ruling's portrayal of Hinduism has rippled through subsequent cases, influencing interpretations in temple entry, trusts, custody disputes, and procedural matters.
In temple management disputes, courts have invoked Paragraph 29 to balance inclusivity with customs. For instance, in a Kerala High Court case under the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Act, 1965, the Court permitted non-Hindu entry when sanctioned by temple authorities like the Thanthri, citing Shastri's emphasis on Hinduism's tolerant ethos. The learned Amicus curiae quoted Shastri Yagnapurushdasji v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya, 1966 SCC OnLine SC 198, noting in paragraph 29 the religion's broad scope. SANIL NARAYANAN NAMPOOTHIRI vs STATE OF KERALA - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 7423
Similarly, restrictions on non-Hindus in temple leases were upheld as valid under statutory frameworks, aligning with Hinduism's defined scope per Shastri. T. M. D. Rafi VS State of Andhra Pradesh - 2019 Supreme(AP) 275
In charitable trust matters, the expansive view of Hindu from Shastri allowed trustees to rename a trust from Hindu Heritage Research Foundation to India Heritage Research Foundation. The court explained that Hindu derives from the Sindhu River, embodying a way of life tolerant of diverse beliefs—a fusion of faiths without exclusion. This change promoted the trust's objects without violating its deed. STATE VS HINDU HERITAGE RESEARCH FOUNDATION CHARITABLE AND RELIGIONS TRUST - 1992 Supreme(Del) 1
Even in family law, Shastri's definition determines applicability. In a child custody battle, the Madras High Court held a child as Hindu under statutes like the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, citing Shastri's historical genesis of the term. Their Lordships followed AIR 1966 SC 1119, affirming Hinduism's broad ambit over narrow religious claims. Balasubramanian Mohan VS Vidya Mohan - 1995 Supreme(Mad) 358
Surprisingly, Shastri appears in procedural rulings on appeals and vakalatnamas. Courts have cited it alongside cases on curing irregularities, like appeals filed without proper authorization, emphasizing justice over technicalities—mirroring Hinduism's flexible spirit. In one instance: In support of his contention, the learned Counsel for the petitioner relies upon Shastri Yagnapurushdasji and others v. Food Corporation of India VS Arvinder Kaur - 2001 Supreme(P&H) 585 Courts remedied lawyer faults, stating the fault of the lawyer should not cause the client to suffer. Food Corporation of India VS Arvinder Kaur - 2001 Supreme(P&H) 585
Another ruling on cross-examination under Order 3 Rule 4 CPC referenced Shastri (AIR 1966 SC 1119) to permit pleaders' delegations, preventing fraud while ensuring speedy justice. Berjesh Goyal VS Daily Foods (India) - 2009 Supreme(Del) 129
Legal professionals are recommended to cite Paragraph 29 precisely when arguing Hinduism's pervasive nature. Hindu Front For Justice Thru. Secy. Ranjana Agnhihotri VS Union of India Thru. Secy. , Secondary & Higher Education - 2016 0 Supreme(All) 932
Paragraph 29 of Shastri Yagnapurushdasji v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya remains a cornerstone for understanding Hinduism's width and pervasiveness—a way of life that embraces multiplicity. Its influence spans decades, from religious endowments to procedural fairness, underscoring the judiciary's nuanced approach.
Key Takeaways:- Reference Paragraph 29 for Hinduism's inclusive definition. Hindu Front For Justice Thru. Secy. Ranjana Agnhihotri VS Union of India Thru. Secy. , Secondary & Higher Education - 2016 0 Supreme(All) 932- Courts consistently apply it to affirm tolerance and flexibility.- Always consider case-specific customs and statutes.
Disclaimer: This post provides general information based on judicial precedents and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for advice tailored to your situation. Rulings may vary by facts and jurisdiction. Always verify original judgments.
For more on Supreme Court interpretations of religion, stay tuned to our blog.
#HinduLaw #SupremeCourtIndia #HinduismJudgment
Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya and another, AIR 1966 SC 1119, wherein it was observed as follows :- ... ".........If an appeal is presented by an Advocate without a Vakalatnama duly signed by the appellant he is required to produce the Vakalatnama authorising him to present the appeal or ... In support of his contention, the learned Counsel for the petitioner relies upon Shastri Yagnapurushdasji and others v.
... ( 11 ) THE historical and etymological genesis of the word "hindu" has been succinctly explained by Gajendragadkar, C. J. in Shastri Yagnapurushdasji v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya. ... Bose it was held that Hindu religion is marvellously catholic and elastic. Its theology is marked by eclecticism and tolerance and almost unlimited freedom of private worship. Its social code is much more stringent, but amongst its different castes and sections, exhibits wi....
" ... ( 10 ) IN AIR 1966 SC 1119 shastri Yagnapurushdasji v. ... Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya it has been held that:"in this case, the Vakalatnama had evidently been signed by respondent No. 1 in favour of the Government Pleader in time; and so, the High Court was plainly right in allowing the Government Pleader to sign the memo of appeal and the Vakalatnama in order
In Shastri Yagnapurushdasji v. ... Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya, 1966 KHC 568 : AIR 1966 SC 1119 : 1966 (3) SCR 242 : 1967 MPLJ 289 : 1967 Mah LJ 289 it was held that: ... “The historical and etymological genesis of the word “Hindu” has given rise to a controversy among indologists, but the view generally accepted by scholars appears to ... Ratnavarma Heggde, 1977 KHC 466 : 1977 (1) SCC 525 : AIR 1977 SC 1848 : 1977 ....
Jawahar Lai Bhargawa and others, AIR 1961 SC 832 ; Shastri Yagnapurush-dasji and others v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya and another AIR 1966 SC 1119 and Jang Singh v. Brij Lal and others, AIR 1966 SG 1631. ... 6. ... In this view of the matter, this Court need not discuss the judgment of Supreme Court in Jagat Dhish Bhargava v Jawahar Lal Bhargawa and others, AIR 1961 SC 832 ; Shastri Yagnapurushdasji and others v, Mutdas Bhundardas #H....
In Shastri Yagnapurushdasji and others v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya and another, AIR 1966 SC 1119, the Apex …4… Court explained the term Hindu and tenets of the Hindu religion as under: “27. ... The historical and etymological genesis of the word "Hindu" has been succinctly explained by Gajendragadkar, C.J. in Shastri Yagna-purushdasji and Ors. v. Muldas Bhundardas Vais....
The learned Amicus curiae, quoting Shastri Yagnapurushdasji v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya , 1966 SCC OnLine SC 198, Seshammal v. State of T.N., (1972) 2 SCC 11, and N. Adithayan v. ... The petitioner states that non-Hindus are not permitted to enter Hindu temples. ... In Shastri Yagnapurushdasji (Supra), the Apex Court in paragraph 29 is observ....
J. in "shastri Yagnapurushadasji v: Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya, AIR 1965 SC 1119. ,, ... 12. ... Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya and An other, 1966 (3) SCO 242, dealing with the genesis of the word hindu observed as follows: ... "the historical and etymological genesis of the word "hindu" has given rise to a controversy amongst indologists; but the view generally accepted by scholars ... (1976) 4 SCC 489 the question whi....
In Shastri Yagnapurushdas ji and Ors. V/s. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya, A. I. R.1966 S.
Their Lordahipa followed the decision in A.I.R. 1966 S.C. 1119 ( Shastri Yagnapurushdasji and others v. ... Mulas Bhundardas Vaishya and another ), and held thus:— ... “The sole question which, however, falls for our consideration in these appeals is whether Nicholas Sundaram is a Hindu governed by Hindu Law. ... ... The historical and etymologival genesis of the word “Hindu” has been succintcly explained by Gajendragadkar, C.J. in Shastri....
The petitioners do not fall within the meaning of "Hindu" as per the judgment in Shastri Yagnapurushdasji and others v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya and another (supra). According to Section 153(1) of the Act 30 of 1987, the Government is empowered to issue any notification in Andhra Pradesh Gazette and make rules for carrying out all or any of the purposes of this Act.
In Shastri Yagnapurushdasji & muldas Bhundardas vaishya [AIR 1966 SC 1119] a Constitution Bench of Supreme Court observed that the Hindu religion may broadly be described as a way of life. The secular ethos of our Constitution may be best appreciated by considering the broad sweep of Hindu Philosophic concepts. In that context, Gajendragadkar, C.J. who spoke for the Bench considered the questions elaborately as to what are the broad features of Hindu religion, thus:
"That part of the great Aryan race", says Monier Willaims, "Which immigrated from Central Asia, through the mountain passes into India, settled first in the district near the river Sindhu (now called the Indus). In Shastri Yagnapurushdasji v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya [AIR 1996 SC 1119] it was held that: "The historical and etymological genesis of the word "Hindu" has given rise to a controversy among indologists, but the view generally accepted by scholars appears to be that the word "Hindu" is derived from the river Sindhu otherwise known as Indus which flows from the Pun....
...It will be recalled that the appeal memo as well as the Vakalatnama filed along with it were signed by Mr. Daundkar who was then the Assistant Government Pleader; and the argument is that since the Vakalatnama had been signed by respondent No. 1 in favour of the Government Pleader, its acceptance by the Assistant Government Pleader was invalid and that rendered the presentation of the appeal by the Assistant Government Pleader on behalf of respondent No. 1 incompetent. Order 41, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure re-quires, inter alia, that every appeal shall be preferred in the form o....
C) Shastri Yagnapurushdasji and others v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaishya and another reported in AIR 1966 SC 1119 wherein it has been held as under ;- "13. Order 41, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure requires, inter alia, that every appeal shall be preferred in the form of a memorandum signed by the appellant or his Pleader and presented to the Court or to such officer as it appoints in that behalf. Object of Rule 4 is to have the authority in favour of a pleader to prevent perpetration of fraud by an unauthorized person taking steps without consent or knowledge of a party a....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
