Yogi government says HC wrong in quashing madrassa law, but it accepted verdict

NEW DELHI: Uttar Pradesh government on Tuesday argued for retention of madrassas and reform of their education system before the Supreme Court and said striking down of the UP Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004 by Allahabad high court was wrong even though the state had accepted the verdict and not appealed against it.

Acting on a bunch of appeals, the SC on Apr 5 stayed the March 22 judgment of the high court which had held the Act to be violative of principles of secularism, and directed the state to admit more than 12 lakh students studying in 13,364 madrassas in regular schools recognised by the state education board.

To a question from a bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, additional solicitor general K M Nataraj, appearing for UP govt, said the state had defended the validity of the Act but accepted the verdict of the constitutional court.

"It is our legislation. The state has wide powers to regulate and reform madrassa education," said the ASG.

Secularism means live and let live, says SC

The high court should not have struck down the Act. It could have examined the validity of certain provisions in the light of Article 21A and Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009,” he said.

The bench agreed with him and said, “The state has a vital interest in mainstreaming madrassas; otherwise how do these institutions produce worthy citizens if they are not acquainted with math, science and other mainstream subjects? We will interpret the Act that way. But to strike down the Act entirely is akin to throwing the baby with bath water.”

The bench’s view synced with the arguments of madrassas and different Muslim organisations. Senior advocate A M Singhvi pointed out that if the state was keen to reform madrassa education, it should not have sat on Madarsa Board’s Oct 2021 decision to include elementary mathematics and science in classes up to secondary level till date.

Supporting HC’s decision, advocate Guru Krishna Kumar argued that UP Board of Madarsa Education Act, being based solely on religion, is non-secular. The CJI said, “India is essentially a religious country. Can religious instructions not be regarded as education? Is it in national interest to ban madrassas, or should they be mainstreamed? People will send their children to madrassas even if they are not recognised. It would be for state to regulate madrassa education to mainstream the syllabus.”

The bench said, “We must look at the broad sweep of the canvas. Religious instructions are not confined only to Muslim community, it is there in every religious community. India is a melting pot of cultures. Let us preserve it that way. Secularism means live & let live.”