Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 30 (0.53 seconds)Rev. Stainislaus vs State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors on 17 January, 1977
60. The aforesaid judgment in Rev. Stainislaus case
[Rev. Stainislaus v. State of M.P., (1977) 1 SCC 677
:1977 SCC (Cri) 147] clearly lays down, though in a
different context, that what is freedom for one is also
the freedom for the other in equal measure. The
perception is explicated when the Court has said that
it has to be remembered that Article 25(1)
guarantees freedom of conscience to other citizens
and notmerely to followers of particular religion and
there is no fundamental right to convert another
person. The right is guaranteed to all citizens. The
right to propagate or spread one's religion by an
exposition of its tenets does not mean
one's religion to convert another person as it affects
the fundamental right of the other. We have referred
to this authority as it has, in a way, dwelt upon the
"intra-conflict of afundamental right".