Bhagavad Gita's Teachings Fundamentally Moral, Not Religious: Gujarat HC Remarks Orally In PIL Against Inclusion Of Teachings In Schools

While hearing a plea challenging the state government's resolution to include the teachings from Bhagavad Gita to be taught in schools, the Gujarat High Court on Thursday (November 21) orally said that the teachings from Bhagavad Gita are fundamentally moral and cultural and not religious. 

As the counsel for the petitioners' contended that the National Education Policy says that principles of all religions in the spirit of secularism should be taught and that the State has no authority to issue such a resolution as for curriculum there are specific authorities in place, the court orally said that the initiative was only to introduce teachings. After hearing the matter for some time the court listed it next month. 

A division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi were hearing a PIL against a 2022 resolution issued by the state government's education department "mandating the learning of values and principles/ tenets in the Gita in the students of Classes 6 to 12 from the academic year 2022-23", purportedly done under the "inspiration and guidance" of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. The petitioner organisations–Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind Gujarat and Jamiat Ulama Welfare Trust also moved an application seeking a stay of the resolution. 

The Senior Counsel for the Petitoner submitted that the main petition has been filed challenging the resolution of the government, which mandates the principles and Tenets of the 'Bhagavad Gita' and its 'Shlokas' and prayers to be incorporated in teaching in Schools.

He contented is that the National Education Policy says that Principles of all religions in the spirit of secularism should be taught and it cannot be based on religion, it has to be on the ethics and the morality which is taught by all religions.

He further submitted that when the National Policy was challenged in the Supreme Court regarding the teaching of religious texts, the Apex Court said that "all religions are part of our culture and ethos and principles of making good human beings are the common element of all religions and they can be taught".

During the hearing the division bench orally said, “this is a kind of moral science lesson". To this the Senior Counsel for the petitioner said that moral science was still neutral. He further submitted that the State was directed by the Court to file a reply before July 19, 2023 in the main petition as per order of July 3, 2023 but it has not been filed yet and the resolution is being implemented.

The Division Bench then orally said “The initiative is only to introduce teachings...teachings of like… you can say the document or preaching".

Petitioner's counsel said that this can't be done as the National Policy doesn't say this. At this point the court orally said, "But, it will be one by one. But it doesn't say that you cannot introduce one at a time”.

The Counsel then contented that the policy says that it has to be comprehensive but it is only picking up Bhagavad Gita.

The Division Bench then orally said “No, sorry, it is one at a time. Suggest someone else they will do it”.

The Counsel then stated that it is a Civil Application (for stay) to prevent the State from carrying on without filing the reply as directed in the main matter, which pertains to the challenge to the resolution. 

He further stated that time has been sought and the court has given direction to file a reply but there is no reply by the State. He orally submitted that “The state cannot frame or direct this...it has no power. For curriculum, there are statutory authorities which the policy recognizes. The resolution is from the state and they have to file a reply".

To this the court orally said that for school education, State can issue directions. The Counsel then said that for curriculum, there are specific authorities which the National Policy recognizes.

The Court then orally observed that the State had only issued suggestions for incorporation and the final call is of  the competent authority. The Counsel then further submitted that “It is implemented and prescribed without going through that route and it is contrary to the policy. Therefore, we are saying that they may not act further”. 

The Division Bench then orally remarked “It is prescribed for incorporation in terms of the National Education Policy which is for the fundamental, like it is our culture, it is not a religious document, it is a culture. “

The Senior Counsel then contended that principles of any religious book are not culture. That would be for that (particular) religion. Principles of a religion is different from morality and these are the questions in the main petition. He further contended that there is not grievance against one and it must be uniform and the Court has directed to file reply but there is no reply as yet from the State.

The Court then said “It is not religion, its morality. It's the part of the culture and these are the infact moral science lessons. Bhagavad Gita is nothing but Moral Science. We all use to read those western moral science lessons for years altogether. It must be uniform but it is one by one. There is nothing in this. This is nothing but only propaganda. Only propaganda. We are fixing the date after a month.”

The Counsel submitted that after going through the National Education Policy, the Court will say that it is (propaganda).

The Court then orally remarked “See Mr. Counsel, Bhagavad Gita has no religious preaching. “Karm kar phal ki iccha matt kar” (Do your work and do not expect results) this the basic fundamental, moral principle”.

The Senior Counsel then requested the court to see what principles are incorporated in the book. “Your lordships may examine…we may be able to persuade your lordships that what is being singled out of one religion,” he added. He further added that it is for the State to see that principles of all religions are respected and not one. 

The Court then orally said “So, you suggest one. It is not for us to say this. Not for the court to issue any direction. It is nothing, nothing contrary to the National Policy”. 

The Senior Counsel then submitted that he will show it is contrary and that the Court may reserve a conclusion after hearing the main matter in detail.

The Court then orally said “That is why we are saying it is nothing but propaganda. You are not arguing the main matter today. Had you argued we would have given our conclusion right now. But you are not arguing so we are keeping a date”. 

The Court then orally observed that they don't see any urgency in the matter. The Counsel again pointed that the State are going ahead with the resolution.

"Let them go ahead with that. Once the curriculum is prepared you can challenge it," the court said.

The Senior Counsel lastly submitted that State has implemented without the curriculum and further requested to fix the main matter for hearing. The matter is next listed after December 23.

Background

In the 2022 resolution, the introduction of the Gita has been segmented. In classes 6 to 8, students will be introduced to the Gita and the stories contained therein. Further, in Classes 9 to 12, the stories and lessons of the Gita would be included in the textbook of the first language of the students. Notably, the students will be evaluated regarding the same. Further, the prayers and stories of the Gita are also mandated to be included in the prayer assemblies. Further, it is also resolved that activities and competitions surrounding the Gita like singing, reciting, and chanting of shlokas, elocution, composition, drama, drawing, quiz etc. would have to be organized by schools. It is further provided that for Classes 6 to 8 and Classes 9 to 12, the study materials with regard to the Gita shall be prepared by the GCERT and the GSHSEB respectively.

The PIL states that the resolution bypassed established statutory bodies and procedures for curriculum design, violating Article 14 of the Constitution. It states that the  inclusion of the Bhagavad Gita in the school curriculum apparently amounts to giving religious instruction and giving primacy to a holy book of Hinduism as purportedly representing Indian values and ideals. It further states that the NEP has been religious neutral and has adhered to prohibitions of religious instruction in schools as provided under Article 28 (prohibition of religious instruction in state-funded institutions) of the Constitution, adding that it is undisputed that the Bhagavad Gita is a "religious book" of the Hindus and all values enunciated in it are interwoven with the tenets of Hindiusim. 

The plea thus states that the resolution is arbitrary and unconstitutional. 

Case Title: Jamiat Ulama-E-Hind Gujarat v/s Union of India