Madrasas ‘unfit’ places for children to receive proper education: NCPCR submits in Supreme Court

NCPCR highlighted issues of curriculum, eligibility of teachers, opaque funding, violation of land laws and failure to provide children a holistic environment as problems associated with madrasas.
| Photo Credit:
Special arrangement

The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), the top child rights protection body in the country, has told the Supreme Court that madrasas are “unsuitable or unfit” places for children to receive “proper education”. The Commission said the textbooks in madrasas “profess supremacy of Islam”.

“Merely teaching a few NCERT Books in the curriculum is a mere guise in the name of imparting education and does not ensure that the children are receiving formal and quality education,” it argued.

NCPCR highlighted issues of curriculum, eligibility of teachers, opaque funding, violation of land laws and failure to provide children a holistic environment as problems associated with madrasas.

“The teachers appointed in madrasas are largely dependent on the conventional methods used in learning Quran and other religious texts. The “scanty and unregularised” working in madrasas creates a haywire system which just stands alone on the conventional ground of religion,” it said.

“Majority of madrasas have no idea as to how to plan social events or extracurricular activities, such as field trips, that could provide students with some level of experiential learning… Madrasa education is neither all-encompassing nor thorough. It is not helping children advance since it lacks so many crucial components of learning. Madrasas infringe on children’s fundamental right to a good education by failing to provide these basic requirements. Children are denied not only a suitable education but also a healthy atmosphere and improved opportunities for growth,” the Commission said.

It said children from faiths other than Islam were also studying in madrasas in Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Providing Islamic religious education to non-Muslims was a violation of Article 28(3) of the Constitution, which upholds the right against forced participation in religious instruction or worship.

Madrasa teachers in U.P. stare at bleak future, vow to continue stir as govt. stops honorarium

The submissions by NCPCR, represented by senior advocate Swarupama Chaturvedi and advocate Abhaid Parikh, were in response to petitions challenging an Allahabad High Court judgment which struck down the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madrasa Education Act, 2004.

The High Court had ordered the transfer of madrasa students to regular schools. The apex court stayed the implementation of the High Court decision in April. On Wednesday, a three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud said the petitions would be taken up for detailed hearing soon.

Taking Uttar Pradesh’s case, the NCPCR drew the court’s attention to the Darul Uloom Deoband Madrasa founded in Deoband in Saharanpur district of Uttar Pradesh.

“According to the information available the Deoband Madrasa fanned out across South Asia and has also set up seminaries, or madrassas, teaching an austere version of Islam, particularly along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border… it has also been alleged by Taliban extremists groups to have been influenced by the religious and political ideologies of Darul Uloom Deoband Madrasa… the Deoband Madrasa issues fatwas online as well as offline and have a very strict and conservative interpretation of Sharia, as evidenced by its issuance of roughly 2,50,000 fatwas which restrict followers in terms of faith, life, and many other aspects,” NCPCR submitted.

“Though madrasas dot the country, only States such as Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand have Madrasa Boards. Large number of children attend madrasas that are either unrecognised or unmapped,” the Commission observed.

“It is unknown whether these institutions provide quality education. The information on the environment these institutions provide to children also remains unknown. Children attending all such institutions (unrecognised and/or unmapped schools) are to be treated as out-of-school, even if they provide regular education,” NCPCR said.

The Commission contended that madrasas do not meet the definition of a school under the Right to Education Act (RTE), 2009.

Though acknowledging that amendments in 2012 had exempted madrasas from the ambit of RTE Act, NCPCR said children who attend these institutions would still be entitled under Articles 21 (right to life) and 21A (right to free and compulsory education) of the Constitution.

“Children who are not in formal schooling system are deprived of their fundamental right to elementary education, including the entitlements such as midday meal, uniform, trained teachers, etc, and since madrasas are exempted from the purview of the RTE Act, these children are deprived of not only formal education in schools but also the benefits provided under the Act,” the Commission said.