New Delhi The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has launched a scathing critique of the madrasa education system in its submissions before the Supreme Court, asserting that these institutions violate children’s fundamental rights to education and are operating in breach of the constitutional mandates and the Right to Education (RTE) Act.
Urging the top court to recognise the need for integrating general education with religious teachings in these institutions, NCPCR submitted that children in madrasas are compelled to follow a rigid curriculum focused on religious education, leaving them without the opportunity to engage in mainstream academic learning.
“It is a flagrant violation of a child’s constitutional right to education to impart instruction that is entirely in the context of religion and that does not adhere to the requirement of the RTE Act, 2009, or any other applicable laws. Innocent children suffer as a result of the religious subject of education becoming institutionalised in madrasas…The absence of formal education in these institutions deprives children of essential skills and knowledge necessary for their holistic development,” stated the child rights body.
NCPCR also expressed concerns over the content of some madrasa textbooks, particularly those promoting “supremacy of Islam”, even as several non-Muslim children were also enrolled in madrasas in the state of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand.
The submissions were made in response to petitions filed by madrasa owners, management societies, and teachers’ associations challenging a March 2024 Allahabad high court judgment that declared the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004 unconstitutional and violative of secularism.
On April 5, a Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud stayed the high court’s decision, emphasising that the issue was not with the Madarsa Act itself but with ensuring that students receive quality education. The court, however, refrained from issuing any direction to the Uttar Pradesh government for continuing to provide state aid to madrasas, which the state claimed to be around ₹1,098 crore annually.
The case was scheduled to come up before the bench on Wednesday, but it could not be heard due to another matter taking up the entire day.
Infringement of children’s fundamental rights
At the heart of NCPCR’s argument is the claim that madrasas confine education to religious teachings, thereby infringing on the rights of children as guaranteed under the RTE Act, 2009 and other relevant laws.
Expressing alarm over the madrasa system’s focus on religious education, the Commission said that children studying in madrasas are deprived of access to a basic school curriculum, resulting in significant educational deficits.
The commission’s stance revolved around the definition of a “school” as provided under Section 2(n) of the RTE Act, which includes any recognised institution imparting elementary education. Madrasas fall outside this definition and, NCPCR claimed, lack the right to compel children to receive education in such settings.
NCPCR further argued that madrasas fail to meet the basic entitlements prescribed under the RTE Act, such as the formation of school management committees, curriculum standards, and teacher qualifications, leaving children without essential educational oversight.
National security concerns and controversial textbooks
A significant part of NCPCR’s submission addressed “objectionable” content found in madrasa textbooks, particularly those teaching “Diniyat” (Islamic religious knowledge). According to the commission, some madrasa textbooks promote the supremacy of Islam, which may foster an exclusionary mindset. NCPCR warned that such teachings could pose a threat to national security by influencing young minds with extremist ideologies.
NCPCR also mention the alleged influence of Darul Uloom Deoband, an unregistered madrasa in Saharanpur, which it said affiliates many other unregistered madrasas across the country. Claiming that the Deoband madrasa has ties to the spread of a strict and austere version of Islam across South Asia, NCPCR alleged that the Deoband madrasa’s ideologies have influenced extremist groups like the Taliban, particularly along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.
Moreover, NCPCR pointed out instances of fatwas issued by the Darul Uloom Deoband, citing a book titled Bahishti Zewar that reportedly contains improper and illegal content concerning child sexual relations. The commission claimed that such material is in violation of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, 2012. It also highlighted alleged fatwas from the Deoband madrasa that discuss issues like physical relationships with minors and even queries on suicide attacks against non-Muslims. These, NCPCR argued, reinforce harmful ideologies and are not only terrorising but also constitute a national security threat.
Broader constitutional violations
NCPCR’s submissions also highlighted alleged violations of several constitutional provisions, including Articles 21, 14, and 15, which ensure a child’s right to life, equality before the law, and protection against discrimination. The Commission argued that madrasa education deprives children of equal opportunities to develop in a “healthy manner, in conditions of freedom and dignity,” as mandated under Article 39(f) of the Constitution.
The submissions contended that the absence of the RTE Act’s provisions in madrasas deprives children of crucial entitlements like midday meals, school uniforms and access to trained teachers. NCPCR stressed that madrasas operating outside the purview of formal schooling should be classified as “out-of-school institutions”, denying children their right to formal, quality education.
NCPCR focussed on the alleged coercion of non-Muslim children into receiving religious instruction in madrasas, which, it contended, is a violation of Article 28(3) of the Constitution. This provision prohibits educational institutions from obligating students to receive religious education without parental consent.
The commission also stressed that Islamic religious education is being imparted to non-Muslim children in several states with madrasa boards, exacerbating the issue of religious instruction crossing constitutional boundaries.
Pan-India ramifications and recommendations
Arguing that the issue extended beyond Uttar Pradesh, NCPCR called for any decision by the Supreme Court to have pan-India implications. The commission requested the court to ensure that notice is served to all states with madrasa boards, given that similar issues of religious instruction and fundamental rights violations are prevalent across the country.
NCPCR urged the top court to recognise that madrasa education, as it currently operates, undermines the right to education and the broader constitutional mandate to provide holistic, secular, and formal schooling for all children.
The state madrasa board estimates that the high court order will have an impact on approximately 200,000 students who are now enrolled in 16,500 recognised and 8,500 unrecognised madrasas or Islamic seminaries throughout Uttar Pradesh. Of the 190 million people living in Uttar Pradesh, 19.26% are Muslims. According to Iftikhar Ahmed Javed, chairman of the Uttar Pradesh Madrasa Education Board, at least 10,000 teachers are attached to these seminaries.
On March 22, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad HC quashed the 2004 Act — enacted by the then ruling Samajwadi Party — directing the state government to accommodate students studying in madrasas in regular schools, casting a shadow of uncertainty over the future of thousands of young students enrolled in madrasas across the state.
In its verdict, the high court said that the state had no power to create a board for religious education or to establish a board for school education only for a particular religion and philosophy associated with it.
