Categories
Hindu Laws

Who is Hindu?

Indian Legal System > Civil Laws > Family Laws >Hindu Laws > Who is Hindu?

Before studying Hindu Law we have to study who is Hindu? Under the codifying Acts, namely, the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956; The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 and the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, the orthodox concept of the term “Hindu” has undergone a radical change and it has been given an extended meaning. These codifying Acts not only apply to Hindus by birth but also to a large number of other persons.

We notice that the codifying statutes of Hindu law do not purport to define who is a Hindu. Rather, the Sections mention the persons to whom they are applicable. Thus, those persons upon whom the Hindu law is applicable will be treated as Hindu in the eyes of law it is immaterial whether they follow any principle of Hindu Law or not. Thus the term Hindu includes, those who are originally Hindus, Jains, Sikhs or Buddhist by religion, those who are converts or reconverts to Hindu, Jain, Sikh or Buddhist religion, the cults and sects following Hindu religion, and followers of Hindu religions.

In Ashima v. Narendra, AIR 6 Cal W N. 1016 case, the Court opined that “so, diverse are the ways of the Hindus that it is almost impossible to exactly define what Hinduism is? It is very aptly said that the Hindu religious system is encyclopedic in character and is a commonwealth of all faiths”.

In Sastri Yagnapurushadji v. Muldas Brudardas Vaishya1966 AIR SC 1119 case, in view of Gajendragadkar. J. “Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim any one prophet, it does not worship any one God, 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. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more”.

In Ram Bhagwan v. J.C. Bose (1903) 301 A 249 and Chandrasekhar v. Kulandaivelu, 1963 SC 185 cases, the Courts held that a person does not cease to be a Hindu if he becomes an atheist, or dissents or deviates the central doctrines of Hinduism or lapses from orthodox religious practices, or adopts Western way of life, or eats beef.

Who can be called a Hindu?

Hindu by Birth:

  • When Both Parents are Hindu: Explanation (a) to section 2(1) provides that any child legitimate or illegitimate, both of whose parents are Hindus, Buddhists, Jains or Sikhs, by religion is a Hindu and Hindu Law applies to him/her.
  • When One Parent is a Hindu: Explanation (b) of section 2(l)of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act further provides that a child legitimate or illegitimate born to parents one of whom alone is a Hindu will be a Hindu if he is brought up as a member of the tribe, community or group to which such parent belongs or belonged. The Hindu parent may be father or mother, what is important is that the child must be brought up as a Hindu. The word ‘belonged’ means that if subsequent to the birth of the child the parent who was a Hindu convert to another religion, the child would continue to be a Hindu provided he is brought up as a Hindu

In Vijaya Kumari v. K. Devibalan AIR 2003 Ker. 363 (DB) case, the Court held that in case of an illegitimate child Hindu Law would apply if either both the parent and Hindus or at least the mother is a Hindu and the child is brought up as Hindu. Precisely the decision was that an illegitimate child would follow the religion of the mother.

In Sapna Vs. State of Kerala, AIR 1993 Ker. 75 case, the petitioner sought the benefit of reservation for admission to medical/agricultural course in the Scheduled Caste quota. Her mother was a Schedules Caste and married a Christian. She changed her name after marriage as Uma Jacob. The name of the petitioner was also Sapna Jacob. There was nothing in the evidence to show that the petitioner ever led a Hindu mode of life. On these facts, the court held that she was not entitled to seek the benefit of reservation in the Scheduled Caste category.

In C. W. T. v. R. Sridharan, 1976 H LR 600(SC) case, the Court held that where a Hindu male married a Christian female and the child was brought up as a Hindu, the family would be Hindu undivided family governed by Hindu Law.

Jainism:

In Boddaladi v. Boddaladi, (1927} 50 Mad. 228, case Kumaraswami Sastri J. observed that ” Jainism has an origin and history much anterior to the Smritis. Jainism rejects the authority of the Vedas and discards all ceremonies and rituals. Jainism does not believe in the existence of God. It holds that by tapasya, by discarding worldly life and its worldly manifestations, Atma can become Paramatma and thus one can attain salvation (moksha)”.

In Chhote Lal v. Chhoonoo Lal (1879)4 Cal 744 (PC)  case, the Court held that both the codified and uncodified Hindu law applied to Jains.

Sikhism:

Sikhs are dissenters from Hinduism. According to the first Guru, Shri Guru Nanak Devji. God is one. Sikhism discards all forms of Hindu worship and class distinctions. The tenets of Sikhism are essentially theistic Viz., God is one, the omnipresent, the omnipotent and omniscient; everyone should worship only one God, instead of numberless gods and goddesses, and should earn his living with his own labour and skill.

In Bhagwan Kour v. J.C. Bose, (1926)7 Lah 275 (Udasis), and Sugan Chand v. Parkash Chand, 1967 SC 506 cases, the Court held that in the absence of special custom among Sikhs they are governed by Hindu law.

Buddhism:

Buddhism is a religion which preaches practically a total negation of life (virakti).

In Ram Pergash v. Mst. Dahan, (1924)3 Pat. 152 case, the Court held that the Buddhists are governed by Hindu, law as modified by custom prevalent and recognized among them.

In Vanni v. Vannichi, (1924) 51Mad. (FB) case, the Court held that the codified Hindu law applied to the Buddhists just as it applies to any other Hindu.

Cults and Movements in Hinduism:

There were certain movements against the orthodox practices in Hinduism. The Brahmos (Members of the Brahmo Samaj) are reformers of Hinduism who profess to restore the Hindu faith to its original purity. They are Vedantists, Ram Mohan Roy, the founder of the cult, propounded a monotheistic interpretation of Vedas. The Arya Samajists (members of Arya Samaj founded by Swami Dayanand Saraswati)  believe in the unity of God and the Vedas. They discard idol worship and are against Class distinction. The followers of Radhaswami sect recognize an impersonal deity and name it as Radha Swami Dayal, the Supreme Being. The deity is represented on this earth by a human being called santsadguru. They believe that salvation lies living in the closest possible proximity of the guru. The Satsangi cult founded by Ramanuja believe that an individual is enjoined to follow the basic Vedic injunction of good, pious and religious life and that the path of salvation lies in the devotion to Lord Krishna. The Swayamariyathis or self-respecters is an anti-purohit cult which does not believe in caste distinctions arid in ritual and ceremonial aspect of Hinduism.

In the cases like Brahmo Samajists (Ram Bhagwan v. J.C. Bose (1903) 301 A 249), Arya Samajists (Shyamsunder v. Shankar, 1960 Mys 27), Radhasoamis (Shanti Swarup v. R.S. Sabha,1969 All 248), Satsangist (Shastri v. Muldas, 1966 SC 1119), Swayainariyathais the Courts held that  these movements represent a revolt against the orthodox practices of Hindus, particularly the ceremonial and ritual aspect of Hinduism, or against the rigidity of class system.

Conversion to Hinduism:

In Peerumal Vs. Poonuswami, AIR 1971 SC 2352 case, the Court held that a person may also become Hindu if after expressing an intention, expressly or impliedly, he lives as a Hindu and the community or casts into the fold of which he is ushered in accepts him as a member of that caste or community.

Reconversion to Hinduism:

A person who ceased to be Hindu by converting into a non-Hindu faith and who has come back to Hindu faith is also a Hindu. Thus, a person who ceased to be a Hindu by converting to non-Hindu religion may again become a Hindu if he reconverts to Hinduism. Jainism, Buddhism or Sikhism. It is not necessary that he reconverts to the same religion from which he converted to the non-Hindu religion.

In S. Anbalagan Vs. B. Devarajan, AIR 1984 SC 411 case, the Supreme Court concerned with a Hindu reconvert to Adi Dravida caste whose parents had converted to Christianity and who was also baptized at the age of seven months. As a reconvert, he successfully contested in the general elections from a reserved seat. His election was challenged mainly on the ground that since he did not belong to the Adi Dravida caste he could not contest from the reserved constituency. It was asserted that he continued to be a Christian. After a review of the authorities and on consideration of the facts, the Supreme Court observed that even if it was assumed that his parents had converted to Christianity and he was baptized when he was seven months old, there was sufficient evidence that he had long since reconverted to Hinduism and was accepted as one of its members by the Adi Dravida caste.

Hindu by Declaration:

In Mohandas Vs. Devaswami Board, 1975 KLT 55  case, one Jesudas, a Catholic Christian by faith and a famous singer, used to give devotional music in a Hindu temple. He also worshipped there like any other Hindu. He had also filed a declaration, “I declare that I am a follower of Hindu faith.” On these facts, the Kerala High Court held that Jesudas had become a Hindu by conversion and opined that if a person bona fide declares that he is a follower of Hindu religion and he consistently follows Hinduism thereafter, then he would be deemed to be a Hindu by conversion.

Any Person Who is Not a Christian, Parsi, Jew or Muslim by Religion:

Clause (c) of section 2(1) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, enacts that it would apply to all persons to whom Hindu Law applied before the passing of this Act except a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion.

From the above explanation we can conclude that a person is a Hindu unless it is shown that he had converted to a non-Hindu religion. In other words, any person who is a Hindu, Jain, Buddhist, or Sikh by religion is a Hindu if (a) he practices, professes or follows any of these religions, and (b) he remains a Hindu even if he does not practice, profess, or follows the tenets of any one of these religions.

Indian Legal System > Civil Laws > Family Laws >Hindu Laws > Who is Hindu?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *