Shastri Yagnapurushadji v Muldas Brudardas Vaishya

Facts

• The Swaminarayan sect operated temples in Gujarat. A dispute arose over whether Dalit Hindus could enter these temples under the Bombay Hindu Places of Public Worship (Entry Authorisation) Act, 1956. The sect argued that its followers constituted a separate religion distinct from Hinduism, and therefore the Hindu temple-entry legislation did not apply to their temples. The High Court held the sect was part of Hinduism.

Issue

1. Whether followers of the Swaminarayan sect constitute a separate non-Hindu religion, such that legislation governing Hindu places of worship does not apply to their temples.

Held

• The Swaminarayan sect is part of the broader Hindu religion. Hinduism is unlike Western religions in that it has no single founder, no single scripture, no single set of dogmas. It is a complex and evolving tradition that encompasses an enormous range of beliefs, from atheism to polytheism, from asceticism to worldly engagement. The essential test is whether the group has separated from the Hindu fold by such a fundamental departure in belief or practice that it constitutes a distinct and separate religion. The Swaminarayan sect, while having its own spiritual leader and practices, worships Hindu deities, follows Hindu scriptures, and has never historically claimed to be non-Hindu. Its temples are Hindu temples and subject to Hindu temple-entry legislation.

Ratio Decidendi

Hinduism is not a religion in the narrow, dogmatic sense; it is a way of life broad enough to include theism, atheism, and agnosticism. A sect or denomination claiming to be outside Hinduism must demonstrate a fundamental and complete severance from the Hindu fold, not merely doctrinal or ritualistic distinctiveness within it. Hindu law applies to all who fall within this broad conception of Hindu identity.