DEFINITION OF HINDU
| Historical View | • The word "Hindu" originates from the Sanskrit word for river, sindhu • The Persians adapted "Sindhu" to "Hindu," as they had difficulty pronouncing the "s" sound. • Over time, the term evolved to encompass the religious and cultural traditions of the people living in the Indian subcontinent, particularly those who were not Muslim |
|---|---|
| Constitution of India | • Explanation II of Article 25- • 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. |
| Hindu Law | • Section 2 of Hindu Marriage Act • Hindu by Religion • Hindu by Birth • Convert or Reconvert |
Section 2 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Following persons are Hindu-
1. any person who is a Hindu by religion in any of its forms or developments, including a Virashaiva, a Lingayat or a follower of the Brahmo, Prarthana or Arya Samaj,
2. any person who is a Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh by religion,
3. any other person who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion,
4. The following persons are Hindus, Buddhists, Jainas or Sikhs by religion, as the case may be: □
- a) any child, legitimate or illegitimate, both of whose parents are Hindus, Buddhists, Jainas or Sikhs by religion;
- b) any child, legitimate or illegitimate, one of whose parents is a Hindu, Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh by religion and who is brought up as a member of the tribe, community, group or family to which such parent belongs or belonged; and
- c) any person who is a convert or re-convert to the Hindu, Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh religion.
Following persons are not Hindu
1. Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion,
2. Members of any Scheduled Tribe within the meaning of clause (25) of Article 366 of the Constitution unless the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, otherwise directs.
Shastri Yagnapurushadji v. Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya [1966 SCR (3) 242, AIR 1966 SUPREME COURT 1119]
In the landmark case of Shastri Yagnapurushadji v. Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya, the Supreme Court of India provided a definitive interpretation of the term 'Hindu'. This case involved the Swaminarayan temple in Ahmedabad, managed by a sect called the Satsangi. The Satsangis restricted non-Satsangi Harijans from entering the temple, arguing that Satsangis followed a distinct religion and were not bound by Hindu law.The Supreme Court, however, held that sects such as Satsangi, Arya Samajis, and Radhaswamis are all part of the Hindu religion since their philosophies and practices are rooted in Hindu traditions. The court emphasized that Hinduism is a broad and inclusive religion, encompassing various sects that share its foundational principles.
Perumal Nadar (Dead) By L.R.S vs Ponnuswami [1971 AIR 2352, 1971 SCR (1) 49]
In this case, Perumal, who was married to a Christian woman, faced a legal dispute when his son, Ponnuswami, claimed a share of Perumal's property. Perumal argued that the marriage was void due to the religious difference between himself and his wife. The Supreme Court held that the intention to convert is sufficient evidence of conversion to Hinduism. The court emphasized that no formal purification ceremony is required for a valid conversion to Hinduism. As a result, the marriage was not void, and Ponnuswami was entitled to a share of the property.
