Who are Hindus? - [ Hindu Law ]

According to Indian law, the term "Hindu" broadly refers to anyone who practices Hinduism, as well as people of other religions such as Buddhism, Jain

According to Indian law, the term "Hindu" broadly refers to anyone who practices Hinduism, as well as people of other religions such as Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism in certain legal contexts. The term is not strictly defined by religious belief alone but is often based on cultural and traditional practices.

In legal terms, the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 and other personal laws apply to:

1. People who follow Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, or Sikhism.
2. People who do not follow other specified religions like Islam, Christianity, Judaism, or Zoroastrianism but are recognized by customs or birth as Hindus.

Essentially, anyone who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi, or Jew and is governed by Hindu law is often legally considered a Hindu in India. This definition serves administrative and legal purposes in areas such as marriage, inheritance, and family law.

Who are Hindus? 

In Indian law, the term “Hindu” is used broadly and is not confined to strict religious practices. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and other related laws govern Hindus, but they also apply to other religions like Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism in specific contexts. Let’s break down the details with sections from key acts:

1. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

This law governs marriages among Hindus. The Act applies to the following people under Section 2:

Section 2(1)(a): Hindus by Religion

• Who it applies to: Any person who practices Hinduism. This includes people who follow local customs, rituals, or belief systems under the broader definition of Hinduism.

Section 2(1)(b): Other Indian Religions

• Who it applies to: Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs. Even though these religions are separate from Hinduism, Indian law includes them under the scope of the term "Hindu" for personal law purposes, such as marriage and inheritance.

Section 2(1)(c): Persons Not Following Other Specified Religions

• Who it applies to: Anyone who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi, or Jew but resides in India and is not governed by any other specific religious personal law. In such cases, they are governed by Hindu laws.

Section 2(1)(Explanation): Hindu by Birth

• Who it applies to: Anyone born to Hindu parents or those who are raised in a Hindu family. If one parent is Hindu and the other isn’t, the person can still be considered a Hindu if they are brought up as one.

2. The Hindu Succession Act, 1956

This law deals with inheritance among Hindus. It also applies to Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs under Section 2 of the Act. Similar to the Hindu Marriage Act, this Act extends to people who are legally considered Hindu.

Definition of Hindu

Although Indian law does not have a precise religious definition for Hinduism, courts and legal systems use a broad cultural understanding. As per various legal rulings, anyone following Hindu philosophies, customs, or born into a Hindu family can be termed a "Hindu" for legal purposes.

Legal Interpretation of “Hindu”

The Supreme Court of India has provided guidance on the meaning of “Hindu” in several cases. The Court recognizes that Hinduism is more of a way of life or a cultural system than a rigid religion with strict doctrines.

3. The Special Marriage Act, 1954

This Act allows people from different religions, including Hindus, to marry without converting to each other’s faith. However, under this Act, the individual’s religious identity becomes secondary, as marriages are performed under secular law.

Important Points:

• Hindus by Religion: People practicing Hinduism, including those following Vedic traditions, local gods, or other rituals.
• Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs: Considered Hindus for the purpose of personal laws like marriage and inheritance.
• Not Muslim, Christian, Parsi, or Jew: If someone doesn’t fall under these religions, and no other law applies, Hindu law applies to them.

In Indian law, the term "Hindu" includes a wide range of people, not just those practicing the Hindu religion. It extends to people of Buddhist, Jain, and Sikh faiths and anyone born into Hindu families or raised as Hindus. This legal definition is used in matters like marriage, inheritance, and adoption, as outlined in laws like the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

Definition of Hindus in Indian Law

The definition of "Hindus" as per Indian law can be explained using Section 2(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. According to this provision, the term "Hindu" is broadly defined to include various religious groups and individuals who follow Hinduism, as well as certain related religions. Here's a simplified explanation of who is considered a Hindu under the law:

Who is a Hindu?

1. Hindus by Religion:

   • Any person who is a Hindu by religion in any of its forms or developments, including specific sects such as Virashaiva, Lingayat, or followers of the Brahmo Samaj, Prarthana Samaj, or Arya Samaj.
   • This also includes people who follow diverse traditions and philosophies within the broader Hindu religion.

2. Related Religions:

   • Any person who is a Buddhist, Jain, or Sikh by religion is also considered a Hindu under the Hindu Marriage Act.

3. Domiciled Persons:

   • Any person who is domiciled in India and does not follow Islam, Christianity, Parsi, or Judaism is also presumed to be governed by Hindu law unless it can be proved that they would not have been governed by Hindu customs if the Hindu Marriage Act had not been passed.

Explanation:

The law provides further clarity on who is considered a Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, or Sikh by religion, as follows:

1. Children of Hindu Parents: Any child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, whose both parents are Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, or Sikhs, is considered a Hindu.

2. Children of Mixed Parentage: Any child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, one of whose parents is a Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, or Sikh, and who is raised as a member of the community, tribe, group, or family of the Hindu parent, is also considered a Hindu.

3. Converts and Re-converts: Any person who converts or re-converts to Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, or Sikhism is legally considered a Hindu.

According to Indian law, the term "Hindu" is broadly defined to include not only those who directly practice Hinduism but also followers of Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism. It also includes children born to Hindu parents, individuals raised in Hindu traditions, and those who convert or re-convert to the faith.

Supreme Court Guidelines on Who are Hindus?

The Supreme Court of India has provided important guidelines and interpretations regarding the definition of Hindus and the application of Hindu laws. While the law does not have a rigid definition of "Hindu," several rulings have clarified the concept for legal purposes.

Here are key Supreme Court guidelines related to the term "Hindu":

1. Broad Definition of Hinduism

The Supreme Court has recognized that Hinduism is not a rigid religion with strict rules and doctrines. It is more of a way of life and includes various philosophies, beliefs, and practices. This was particularly noted in the case of Shastri Yagnapurushdasji vs Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya (1966), where the Court emphasized that Hinduism is not a single set of beliefs but a broad cultural system. The Court stated:

"Hinduism is a way of life, a philosophy, not just a religion in the narrow sense of the term. It accepts many forms of worship and many paths to ultimate truth."

2. Inclusion of Other Religions under Hindu Law

The Court clarified that Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs are legally considered Hindus for the purposes of applying Hindu laws such as marriage and inheritance. This interpretation aligns with the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The Court has upheld this in multiple rulings, maintaining that even though these religions are distinct, they are included under the broader umbrella of Hindu personal laws.

3. Legal Definition of a Hindu (In cases of inheritance and marriage)

In several judgments, the Court has clarified who can be considered a Hindu for legal purposes. For example:

• Hindu by Birth: If both parents are Hindu or one parent is Hindu and the child is raised as a Hindu, the child will be considered Hindu for legal purposes.
• Hindus by Religion: People practicing Hinduism in its various forms, including those following Vedic traditions, local customs, or regional variations of Hindu belief, are considered Hindu.

4. Hinduism as an Inclusive and Evolving Religion

In cases such as Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Madras vs Late R. Sridharan (1976), the Supreme Court emphasized the inclusive and evolving nature of Hinduism. The Court recognized that Hinduism is not confined to a fixed set of beliefs or practices, making it adaptable to different contexts and periods.

5. Freedom of Religion and Hinduism

In the S.P. Mittal vs Union of India (1983) case, the Supreme Court noted that people who profess Hinduism are free to follow their individual beliefs and practices. This case highlighted the diversity within Hinduism, affirming that people could practice the religion in various ways without losing their legal identity as Hindus.

6. Hindus under Personal Law

The Supreme Court has upheld that, under Hindu personal law, individuals who identify with Hindu culture or are governed by Hindu customs, even if they do not strictly follow religious rituals, are considered Hindus for legal purposes. This was reinforced in cases dealing with marriage, divorce, and inheritance.

7. Scheduled Tribes and Hindu Law

In the Murlidhar Dayandeo Kesekar vs Vishwanath Pandu Barde (1995) case, the Supreme Court addressed whether people from Scheduled Tribes, who follow their own tribal customs, can be governed by Hindu law. The Court ruled that unless specific tribal customs are proven to be different, the general principles of Hindu law will apply to them.

8. Conversion and Reconversion

The Supreme Court has provided guidelines on issues of conversion and reconversion to Hinduism. In cases where people convert to other religions, they no longer fall under Hindu personal laws. However, if they reconvert to Hinduism, they are once again governed by Hindu laws, provided they can prove their reconversion.

9. Constitutional Protection of Hindu Practices

The Constitution of India guarantees freedom of religion under Article 25, but it also allows the state to regulate or restrict secular activities associated with religious practices. The Supreme Court has balanced the protection of Hindu religious practices with the state's power to intervene in religious matters when necessary, such as in cases of social reform or gender equality.

10. Hindus as Defined by Customs

The Court has also clarified that even people who may not strictly follow the doctrines of Hinduism but are governed by Hindu customs and traditions can be treated as Hindus under law. For instance, individuals who follow regional or tribal customs but identify culturally as Hindus are covered under Hindu laws.

The Supreme Court’s guidelines offer a flexible, inclusive, and evolving interpretation of Hinduism for legal purposes. It recognizes the vast diversity within the religion, encompassing not only those who strictly practice Hindu rituals but also people from other related faiths like Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism, and those governed by Hindu customs.

Landmark Cases on Who are Hindus?

A landmark case in defining "Who are Hindus" in Indian law is the Shastri Yagnapurushdasji vs Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya case, decided by the Supreme Court of India in 1966. This case is significant because it provided a broad and inclusive definition of Hinduism and clarified who can be considered a Hindu under the law.

Shastri Yagnapurushdasji vs Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya (1966)

Facts of the Case:

The case arose when the Swaminarayan sect, a religious group, wanted to declare itself as a separate religion from Hinduism. They argued that their founder, Swaminarayan, had started a new and distinct religion. The case was brought before the Supreme Court to determine whether members of the Swaminarayan sect should be considered Hindus or followers of a separate religion.

Judgment:

The Supreme Court ruled that Hinduism is not a narrow or defined religion but a way of life that includes a variety of beliefs, traditions, and practices. The Court held that members of the Swaminarayan sect are still considered Hindus, as their religious philosophy and practices are part of the broader spectrum of Hindu beliefs.

Key Observations by the Court:

1. Hinduism as a Way of Life: The Supreme Court emphasized that Hinduism is not a rigid religion with a strict set of rules and dogmas. Instead, it is a way of life and includes diverse practices, beliefs, and philosophies.

   The Court stated: “Hinduism does not rest on the teachings of one prophet, 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.”

2. Inclusivity: The Court noted that Hinduism is inclusive and encompasses various religious traditions such as Vedic and non-Vedic beliefs. It does not require followers to adhere to a single book or prophet, and it accepts a variety of paths to salvation.

3. No Single Definition of Hinduism: Hinduism was recognized as a vast cultural and spiritual system that allows for freedom of thought, and there is no single definition of who can be considered a Hindu.

4. Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism: The Court recognized that even though these religions have distinct philosophies, they are also part of the broader Hindu tradition in terms of cultural heritage and personal laws. As a result, people following these religions are legally considered Hindus for purposes like marriage and inheritance.

Conclusion:

The Shastri Yagnapurushdasji vs Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya case established that Hinduism is a broad and inclusive system that cannot be defined narrowly by specific religious practices or beliefs. This judgment has become the foundation for defining Hindus in Indian law and has been used in many subsequent cases to determine the applicability of Hindu personal laws.

The ruling clarified that anyone who follows or is governed by Hindu customs and traditions is considered a Hindu, making the definition flexible and adaptable to different contexts.

1. Brahmo Samaj vs. Amarendra Nath Tagore (1861)

This case dealt with the Brahmo Samaj, a reformist movement within Hinduism, and the question of whether Brahmo Samaj followers were still Hindus for legal purposes. The Court held that while the Brahmo Samaj rejected some traditional Hindu practices, it still fell within the broad category of Hinduism.

Significance:

• The Court recognized that people could reform or reject some Hindu practices and still be considered Hindus legally.
• It reinforced that Hinduism is not a religion confined to any rigid doctrines or texts, allowing movements like Brahmo Samaj to maintain their Hindu identity despite their reforms.

2. Perumal Nadar vs Ponnuswami (1970)

This case is significant because it dealt with the issue of conversion and reconversion in Hinduism. The Supreme Court ruled that a person who had converted from Hinduism to another religion and later reconverted to Hinduism could still be treated as a Hindu under the law.

Key Points:

• The Court observed that a reconversion to Hinduism is valid as long as the person sincerely accepts Hinduism again, irrespective of the manner of reconversion.
• This case reinforced the idea that Hinduism is open to reconversion, and that people who return to the faith are entitled to the legal benefits provided by Hindu personal laws.

Significance:

• It established that conversion and reconversion are recognized within Hindu law.
• The ruling allowed for flexibility in maintaining one's Hindu legal identity, even after embracing another religion.

3. Lily Thomas vs. Union of India (2000)

This case addressed the issue of individuals converting to another religion to enter into a second marriage without dissolving their first marriage, a common practice to evade Hindu marriage laws. The Supreme Court ruled that such conversions with the intent of committing bigamy (polygamy) were invalid.

Key Points:

• The Court held that a Hindu could not evade the provisions of Hindu marriage law by converting to another religion solely for the purpose of entering into another marriage.
• The judgment reinforced the importance of upholding the principles of Hindu personal law and stated that conversion to Islam, or any other religion, just to remarry would not dissolve the obligations from the first marriage.

Significance:

• This case highlighted the integrity of Hindu personal law, especially regarding marriage, and prevented the misuse of religious conversion to bypass legal responsibilities.
• It established that religious conversion does not automatically absolve someone from the personal law obligations that arose when they were Hindu.

Summary of the Cases:

1. Brahmo Samaj vs. Amarendra Nath Tagore (1861): Established that reformed Hindu movements, like Brahmo Samaj, are still considered Hindu for legal purposes.
2. Perumal Nadar vs. Ponnuswami (1970): Clarified that reconversion to Hinduism is recognized legally, allowing people to regain Hindu identity after converting to another religion.
3. Lily Thomas vs. Union of India (2000): Prevented the misuse of religious conversion for bigamy, upholding the sanctity of Hindu marriage law.

These cases together illustrate the flexibility and inclusivity of Hinduism in Indian law, while also setting legal boundaries on how Hindu personal law can be applied or evaded.