If the Constitution of India is the yardstick to judge the fact of India being a Secular State, then it is not! The Article of the Constitution, which grants Religious Freedom to all the Citizens of the Country, i.e., Article 25 reads as under:

Right to Freedom of Religion

25. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion.—(1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion.
(2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law—
(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;
(b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.
Explanation I.—The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion.
Explanation II.—In sub-clause (b) of clause (2), the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly.

If India is a Secular State then why has it given itself the constitutional powers to throw open “Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus”? Were the framers of the constitution so sure that due to Hindu majority status of India, the Government and the Rulers of the State would be always of a “Hindu Character” only? Even the very definition of the country in Part I, “Name and territory of the Union”, calls it “India, that is Bharat”. It does not mention “Hindustan”, which has been the popular traditional name of India in the local parlance for ages. It uses the Hindi connotation, which is supposed to be the language of Hindus of North India. Dominance of Hindu character can be seen in many other spheres of the State.

Secular means “temporal”, worldly rather than spiritual. India is a highly spiritual country. The word “Secular” in its most common sense means “outside of religion”. In current political and philosophical discourse, it refers to a government obeying civil laws (as opposed to religious instructions like the Islamic Shariah, the Catholic canon law or rabbinical law), independently from any religion, and not favouring any particular religion; in addition, secularism also includes the priority of the civil laws over any religious legislation. It is a policy of avoiding entanglement between government and religion, of non-discrimination among religions, and of guaranteeing human rights of all citizens, regardless of the creed (and, if conflicting with certain religious rules, by imposing priority of the universal human rights). Neither the Indian Constitution nor the actions of the Government of India conform to this universal definition of Secularism. India may claim to be secular in theory but not in practice. Even in the day-to-day functioning, the Secular outlook is abandoned. Almost all State as well as private ceremonies and functions in India start with some type of traditional Hindu rituals such as lighting of lamps, breaking of coconuts or even recitations from the Bhagvad Gita. Indian Society is deeply religious and spiritual. It has evolved over thousands of years and has produced numerous religious and spiritual leaders. A large number of Hindus after retirement from the worldly affairs become mendicants (Sadhus) and roam throughout the country visiting various religious shrines and spiritual centres. People in general believe in destiny and have strong religious faith. The number of devotees visiting various religious shrines and holy places is in millions. It is virtually impossible for an average Indian family to separate religion from its daily life.

All units of the Indian Army as well as Paramilitary forces carry along complete religious paraphernalia. These contain as part of their logistics, mobile Hindu temples, Sikh gurduwaras and sometimes mosques and churches depending upon the religious composition of the unit. Religious priests of different faiths form part of these defence and security related formations. In all Government offices and Security related agencies one finds a large number of deeply religious persons. They cannot get over their religious leanings while discharging their duties. In fact, during the NDA rule, there were deliberate attempts at posting fanatic Hindutva followers in key positions in the entire administrative and security machinery. They were quite successful in achieving this objective, which is clear from the slow process in improving Indo-Pak relations in spite of the tremendous urge at the ground level on both sides. The Hindutva followers went even to the extent of changing the contents of history and other textbooks prescribed for schools. There is a general mindset among the people at large to consider India as a Hindu Country notwithstanding the loud proclamations of the rulers as well as some opposition leaders and so-called intellectuals. The oft-repeated proclamations of politicians and some so-called intellectuals seem to be a very crude attempt to get over the guilt of initial compromise on the Secular Status of the country made in 1947 by the leaders of the freedom struggle. After having agreed to the partition of the country on religious lines it seems totally hypocritical to claim the one part to have remained secular! The division of India into two dominions was on the basis of religion. The Muslim majority areas were constituted into Pakistan and the Hindu majority areas became Bharat. Leaders of both sides accepted the partition. Joseph Stalin in one of his commentaries on the “National Liberation Struggle of India” describes these leaders as pseudo revolutionaries as they compromised on the basic principles of National Liberation because of their hunger for power! Had they resisted the partition, which was the deliberate game plan of the imperialists to continue their hold on the sub-continent even after independence, India would have remained a truly secular country with its unity in diversity. Only the independence may have been delayed by few years! Claiming the country to be secular after the initial compromise is only a façade to cover up the guilt.