Parmeshwar: it is very easy to categorise that article 26 is a collective of individual- that is not true, over the years, collective organised religion develops its own identity. when mylords say articles 25 is conflict with 26, its also other people's right which is also under challenge. my submission is reading of articles 25 and 26 must not collapse the identity of article 26 to 25. article 26 has doctrinal character and that is why the relation is not merely individual v denomination, article 26 has its identity of its own.

the word religion would inform the word religious practice, matters of religion and denominational rights.