In a significant verdict, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court observed that Hinduism is inclusive while Abrahamic religions are inherently exclusive, while dealing with the denial of FCRA registration to a charitable trust engaged in Zen meditation activities.
A High Court Division Bench comprising Justices G R Swaminathan and M.D. Sumathi was hearing a petition filed by Kanzeon Public Charitable Trust, Montessori School, Perumalai, near Kodaikanal in Dindigul district. The court reserved the matter for orders on October 1 and pronounced the verdict on October 6.
In a 14-page order authored by Justice Swaminathan, the court raised the question, “Does one have the right to obtain a certificate of registration from the central government under Section 11 of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 and if so under what circumstances?”
The petitioner, who founded the trust in 2021 and was already registered under Sections 12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, sought a certificate of registration under the provisions of the FCRA, 2010. His petition dated June 18, 2025, was rejected by an order dated November 19, 2025. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed a civil miscellaneous appeal.
Counsel for the appellant stated that the trust had established a Zen Meditation Centre at Kodaikanal and that its activities could not be labelled as religious, saying that it was not a religious organisation.
According to the respondent, the trust was engaged in religious programmes. The appellant’s counsel waxed eloquent on the good impact that Zen Meditation practices have on oneself. Such practices belong to the Dhyana tradition of this nation and should not be seen as religious, the counsel argued, praying that the order impugned in the appeal be set aside.
The court said that the Senior Standing Counsel submitted that the impugned order was well reasoned and did not call for interference. He added that the policy of the Government of India was to check the inflow of foreign funds that may be deployed for carrying out conversion and other activities which would harm the secular fabric of the country. He pressed for dismissal of the appeal.
The judge then examined the nature of the organisation and its activities. He said, “The very word ‘Zen’ has something catchy about it. There are several cult books on this theme. Many a celebrity has endorsed Zen… The Standing Counsel pointed out that the author of the trust and the moving spirit behind the appellant organisation is an ordained Christian pastor. He is addressed as ‘Rev. Fr. Ama Samy SJ’. One cannot forget the fact that Christianity is a messianic religion. Their theological and religious mission is to bring everyone within the fold of Jesus Christ. There is a saying, ‘a leopard will not change its spots’.”
The Judge went on to make the broader observation central to the FCRA issue. He said, “Unlike Hinduism which is inclusive, the Abrahamic religions are inherently exclusive. The devout Jews, Christians and Muslims believe that theirs is the one true and complete revelation because that is what their Holy books say of themselves. With this nagging doubt, we stepped into the appellant’s website. We came across the following motif that has been prominently installed in the meditation centre.”
Explaining further, the court said, “It is necessary to make a clear distinction between a religious organisation and a cultural or educational entity…. Such misclassification can have serious economic and funding consequences. The regulatory framework governing foreign contribution should operate in tandem with the New Educational Policy, 2020… Zen philosophy is of Chinese origin.”
The court also linked the question of FCRA registration with the possible use of foreign funds for religious conversion. The judge said, “If foreign funds are freely allowed inside to facilitate conversion activities, the sovereignty of the nation would be imperilled. We specifically highlight the issue of conversion because radical Christian Institutions are notorious for indulging in such activities. We hasten to clarify that we do not accuse the appellant of having any such agenda…. A fundamentalist Hindu Organisation engaged in Ghar Wapsi cannot be registered under FCRA. The statutory regime which was put in place during UPA rule (2010) is intended to subserve secular objects.”
The court further said, “When the statute envisages a frank disclosure of all the details, any misrepresentation would entail rejection of the application itself. Though the applicant is engaged in religious programmes, they wrongly projected themselves as non-religious.”
Dismissing the appeal, the Judge held that there was no right as such to receive foreign contribution and that it could at best be a privilege.
He said, “The authority must however correctly classify the applicants. Persons and organisations engaged in upholding the civilisational heritage of India have to be classified as educational or cultural. If the programs of the applicant pertain to worship and rituals, they will fall under the religious category. Religious organisations, whose activities would not affect the nation’s secular fabric and social amity, are entitled to obtain FCRA registration. But organisations engaged in converting people of one religious faith to another shall be denied FCRA registration.”
Thus, while dismissing the appeal, the court emphasised the distinction between religious, cultural and educational organisations and held that organisations engaged in conversion activities would not be entitled to FCRA registration.
