YULITHA HYDE Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are three applications under Article 226 of the Con- stitution essentially challenging the vires of the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act 2 of 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and were heard analogously. This common judgment shall dispose of all these applications.

(2.) THOUGH the main challenge is on a common stand several allegations have been made in these applications which it may be useful to briefly indicate.

(3.) NO return has been made to the rule nisi issued by this Court in any of these applications. While in spite of time being granted for filing of affidavits in opposition in the first two cases no steps have been taken; in the last case, on 89-1969, counsel on behalf of the State of Orissa stated that no counter affidavit was intended to be filed. We should have, therefore, ordinarily assumed all the allegations of fact raised in the applications to be correct and proceeded straightway to deal with the questions of law canvassed at the hearing. We, however, think it appropriate to examine in brief the correctness of the allegations that propagation and propagation by adopting some of the methods which have been made offences under the Act in particular are a part of the Christian religion. We have been referred to the Scriptures as the ultimate basis for such contention.