Secularism needs to be practiced; not left on paper as a constitutional principle: Supreme Court

Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kumar has said secularism needs to be actuated in practice and reality, rather than be left on paper to be enshrined as a constitutional principle. 

This observation came to be made by Justice Kumar while he and Justice SC Sharma have delivered a split verdict in a review petition against its order directing constitution of a Special Investigation Team to probe allegations regarding the State failure to probe an assault during the 2023 Akola Riots.

While Justice Sanjay Kumar has found no grounds for review, Justice SC Sharma has noted that "as review and recall has been sought of the judgment to the limited extent that “it directs or mandates the composition of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) on the basis of religious identity” requires consideration, notice be issued to the respondents, returnable within two weeks.

The main contention in the review petition wad that the direction to constitute a special investigation team, comprising senior police officers of both Hindu and Muslim communities, would impinge upon the principle of institutional secularism and amounts to prejudging communal bias on the part of public servants.

"This contention loses sight of the fact that this Court specifically noted that the question that arose in the appeal was as to what extent the police had discharged their task of being vigilant, prompt and objective in enforcing and securing the mandate of the law without bias and subjectivity. The facts set out in the order clearly demonstrate that despite information being given as to the commission of a cognizable offence, neither the officers of the police station concerned nor the Superintendent of Police took necessary action by at least registering an FIR, clearly manifesting total dereliction of duty on their part, be it deliberate or due to sheer carelessness", Justice Kumar has said.

He further noted as the case related to communal riots, involving Hindu and Muslim communities, and the hues of this case prima facie hinted at a religious bias, it was necessary to direct constitution of an investigation team comprising senior police officers of both communities so as to maintain transparency and fairness in the investigation.

Referring to the observations made in Balram Singh vs. Union of India, wherein it was said that India has developed its own interpretation of secularism, wherein the State neither supports any religion nor penalizes the profession and practice of any faith, Justice Kumar has said, "This being the ideal, the State machinery must tailor its actions accordingly but the inescapable fact remains that such State machinery ultimately comprises members of different religions and communities. Therefore, transparency and fairness in their actions must be manifest in matters even remotely touching upon secularism and religious oppression. In such circumstances, constitution of an investigation team comprising members of the communities involved in the communal riot would go a long way in ensuring and safeguarding the transparency and fairness of the investigation to be carried out and there is no impingement of any idealistic principle."

In October, the Supreme Court had directed the Secretary of the Home Ministry, Maharashtra government, to constitute a special investigation team (SIT), comprising senior police officers of both Hindu and Muslim communities, to investigate allegations made by a Muslim youth that he had witnessed an assault upon a man who later died during riots in Akola on May 13, 2023.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma ordered the SIT to investigate the matter by registering an FIR also in connection with the assault upon appellant Mohammad Afzal Mohammad Sharif and take appropriate action as warranted. The order was passed in a special leave petition (SLP) filed by the youth, who challenged the Bombay High Court's refusal to issue directions on his writ petition.

Taking a serious view of "total dereliction of duty on part of police, be it deliberate or due to sheer carelessness", the bench had observed, "When members of the police force don their uniforms, they are required to shed their personal predilections and biases, be they religious, racial, casteist or otherwise. They must be true to the call of duty attached to their office and their uniform with absolute and total integrity. Unfortunately, in the case on hand, this did not happen".

Case Title: THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS Vs. MOHAMMAD AFZAL MOHAMMAD SHARIF

Judgment Date: November 7, 2025

Bench: Justices Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma