The Gujarat High Court considered a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the state government's 2022 decision to introduce teachings from the Bhagavad Gita into the school curriculum.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi noted in oral observations that the Gita is a moral and cultural text rather than a purely religious one. The court scheduled the next hearing for December 23.

The PIL, filed by Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind Gujarat and the Jamiat Ulama Welfare Trust, challenges the state government's resolution mandating the inclusion of Bhagavad Gita stories, principles, and prayers in the curriculum for Classes 6 to 12. The petitioners contend that this decision contravenes the National Education Policy (NEP), which emphasizes secularism and advocates teaching universal ethical principles derived from all religions. They argue that the resolution violates Articles 14 and 28 of the Constitution by favoring a Hindu religious text in a secular education system.

Additionally, the PIL asserts that the resolution undermines the NEP’s principle of religious neutrality by incorporating Hindu religious teachings into the curriculum.

Senior Advocate Isa Hakim, representing the petitioners, argued that the resolution breaches the secular essence of the National Education Policy (NEP), which advocates for the uniform inclusion of principles from all religions.

Referring to a Supreme Court ruling, he emphasized the importance of teaching universal values shared across all religions, asserting that morality is a common thread among faiths and that no single religious text should be given precedence.

The Chief Justice remarked, “This PIL is nothing but propaganda, a stunt” emphasising that the Gita’s teachings are not religious but moral and ethical in nature. “Bhagwad Gita has no religious preaching. Karma kar, phal ki iksha mat kar (One should believe in doing good deeds without expecting rewards)—this is a basic, fundamental, moral principle,” the court further stated.

The court rejected allegations that the resolution carried religious bias, comparing the initiative to traditional Moral Science lessons. “This is a kind of moral science. Such lessons have always included teachings of preachers,” the Chief Justice said.

The petitioners argued that Moral Science lessons are inherently neutral, unlike the Bhagavad Gita, which is tied to a specific religious tradition. They also highlighted that the State had yet to file a response addressing these concerns. 

In response, the court clarified that the National Education Policy (NEP) does not prohibit the introduction of teachings from a single source. "The NEP doesn’t say that you cannot introduce one teaching at a time. Other such teachings can be implemented incrementally," the Bench observed, asserting that the circular is not inconsistent with the NEP.

Finding no immediate urgency to stay the resolution, the court allowed the State to proceed with its implementation. "Once the curriculum is prepared, then you can challenge it," the Bench advised the petitioner's counsel, emphasizing that the initiative does not constitute religious instruction.

The court adjourned the matter, stating that the case's merits would be considered during the next hearing.