The commission claims that madrasa education is inadequate and inappropriate for children
Mohammad Alamullah | Clarion India
NEW DELHI — Muslim scholars, educators, and madrasa officials have rejected the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) report that claims Islamic seminaries are providing inadequate and inappropriate education to children. Terming the report as “biased and misleading,” they argued that it was based on flawed assumptions and a limited understanding of the role madrasas play in the country’s education system. Further, they said the commission’s allegations are politically motivated and designed to marginalise minority institutions.
Maulana Arshad Madani, a prominent Islamic scholar and president of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, criticised the report as “biased and discriminatory.” Madrasas, he said, have historically played a crucial role in shaping India’s intellectual, moral, and cultural landscape. “This report reflects a deep-rooted bias against Islamic educational institutions. Madrasas have contributed significantly to the intellectual and moral fabric of India. The curriculum is designed to impart both religious and basic modern education,” Madani asserted.
The NCPCR has recently submitted an affidavit to the Supreme Court, claiming that madrasas are providing inadequate and inappropriate education to children. The NCPCR’s affidavit, filed in response to a petition challenging the March 2024 Allahabad High Court ruling that declared the Madrasa Board unconstitutional, accused madrasas of failing to offer standardised and modern education. The commission argued that the educational environment in madrasas does not meet the requirements set by the Right to Education (RTE) Act and is therefore inadequate for the holistic development of children.
Jamiat chief Madani stressed that madrasas provide a holistic education, one that includes moral and ethical teachings alongside modern subjects like mathematics and science. “Madrasas are not only teaching religious texts; many have incorporated NCERT textbooks into their curriculum. This balanced education provides children with a comprehensive understanding of both religious and worldly knowledge,” he added.
Similarly, Khalid Saifullah Rahmani, the general secretary of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), dismissed the NCPCR claims as “misleading.” Rahmani noted that madrasas, far from being isolated from modern education, are actively integrating subjects such as English, science, and social studies into their curricula. “It is wrong to assume that madrasa education is inferior just because it follows a different path from mainstream schools. Many madrasas are already using NCERT books and offering a well-rounded education,” Rahmani stated.
Rahmani also refuted the claim that madrasas teach religious supremacy. He argued that Islamic education in madrasas is not about promoting any sense of superiority but rather about teaching core values such as respect, tolerance, and ethical conduct. “The NCPCR’s accusation that madrasas promote religious supremacy is not only unfounded but also maligns the reputation of these institutions,” he said.
The NCPCR affidavit stated that “madrassas are not suitable places for educating children.” According to the commission, madrasas do not qualify as schools under the RTE Act, which mandates specific educational standards, resources, and facilities that madrasas purportedly lack. These include qualified teachers, modern infrastructure, and even basic services like mid-day meals and school uniforms.
The report further claimed that the curriculum taught in madrasas is not aligned with mainstream education, rendering students unable to compete with their peers in recognised schools. “The education provided is substandard, and parents are often unaware of the actual progress of their children,” the affidavit argued. The commission expressed concern that students in madrasas are deprived of essential life skills and knowledge required for the competitive world beyond their religious education.
Adding to these allegations, the NCPCR criticised the presence of non-Muslim students in madrasas, particularly in states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, and Madhya Pradesh. The affidavit argued that teaching Islamic religious education to non-Muslim children is a violation of their constitutional rights, particularly under Article 28, which protects the right to freedom of religion.
The NCPCR also highlighted the influence of Darul Uloom Deoband, one of the most prominent Islamic seminaries in South Asia. The commission contended that the conservative and rigid interpretation of Islamic law promoted by Deoband has negatively impacted madrasas across India and the region. “Darul Uloom Deoband has been responsible for over two and a half million fatwas, which include conservative interpretations of Shariah law, and this influence is reflected in the curriculum and teachings of madrasas,” the report claimed.
Non-Muslim Students
A key aspect of the NCPCR’s report focused on the enrolment of non-Muslim students in madrasas, especially in states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. The commission argued that teaching Islamic religious education to non-Muslim children violates constitutional guarantees of religious freedom.
However, Maulana Abdul Qasim Nomani, the rector of Darul Uloom Deoband, addressed the issue by pointing out that madrasas do not compel non-Muslim students to study religious subjects. “There is no compulsion for non-Muslim students to participate in Islamic studies. In fact, many non-Muslim parents voluntarily enrol their children in madrasas because of the moral and disciplined environment they provide,” Nomani explained.
Nomani further criticised the NCPCR’s failure to acknowledge the role of madrasas in offering free education to underprivileged children, both Muslim and non-Muslim. “Madrasas have historically been a refuge for the poor, providing them with an education they may not otherwise be able to afford. This is a charitable service that benefits all communities,” he added.
Broader Implications
Beyond the Muslim community, social activists and education experts have also voiced concerns over the NCPCR findings. Anjali Bhardwaj, a social activist and education reform advocate, criticised the report as “narrow-minded” and accused the commission of pursuing a political agenda.
“Madrasas have been a part of India’s educational and cultural landscape for centuries. Dismissing them outright as ‘inadequate’ ignores the diversity and richness of India’s educational institutions. Rather than targeting these institutions, the government should focus on working with them to modernise the curriculum and integrate them into the larger educational framework,” Bhardwaj said.
Bhardwaj also pointed out that the NCPCR’s report is part of a broader narrative that seeks to undermine minority institutions in India. “This is not just about education reform. This report is part of a wider attempt to marginalise institutions that cater to minorities. The government should be supporting diversity in education rather than trying to homogenise it,” she added.
Despite the backlash, the NCPCR stands firm on its report. In its affidavit, the commission reiterated that madrasa students are deprived of basic school amenities and that the current curriculum is insufficient to prepare them for modern life. “Madrasas are not providing a complete education. Students do not have access to modern facilities, trained teachers, or essential services like mid-day meals,” the affidavit stated.
On Wednesday, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud indicated that the matter would be heard in detail soon. Both the NCPCR and the petitioners challenging the Allahabad High Court’s ruling are expected to present their arguments in the coming weeks.
For now, the future of madrasa education remains uncertain. The outcome of the Supreme Court hearings will not only determine the fate of thousands of madrasa students but also set a precedent for the role of religious institutions in India’s broader education system. As both sides prepare for the next phase of legal proceedings, the debate over madrasa education continues to be a focal point of discussions surrounding minority rights, educational reform, and the secular fabric of the country.