The Madras High Court has upheld the Union government's decision to reject foreign funding registration for a Tamil Nadu-based charitable trust, ruling that the organisation failed to candidly disclose its religious character.

The judgment was delivered on Tuesday by a Division Bench comprising Justice G.R. Swaminathan and Justice M.D. Sumathi. The ruling dismissed an appeal filed by Kanzeon Public Charitable Trust, which manages a Montessori school and a Zen meditation centre at Kodaikanal in Dindigul district. The trust had challenged a Ministry of Home Affairs order rejecting its application for registration under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (FCRA).

The legal dispute centered on how the trust classified its activities. Represented by advocate G. Baskar, the trust contended that its Zen meditation programmes belong to India's spiritual Dhyana tradition and should be categorised as non-religious. Conversely, Central Government Senior Standing Counsel G. Thalaimutharasu argued that the trust conducts religious programmes and that strict regulatory oversight is necessary to prevent foreign funds from compromising the nation's secular fabric.

Judges point to leadership and religious symbolism

Dismissing the trust's arguments, the High Court held that Zen Buddhism is a variant of the Mahayana Buddhist school and therefore falls under the umbrella of a religious denomination. Under Form FC-3A of the FCRA Rules, applicants must clearly state whether they are a religious, cultural, economic, educational, or social organisation.

The Bench observed that the trust ought to have made a transparent declaration rather than projecting itself as non-religious. Writing for the Bench, Justice Swaminathan noted that "the appellant need not have been so coy" and added that "one cannot keep any card up one's sleeve".

Court scrutiny revealed that the moving spirit and founder behind the trust is Rev. Fr. Ama Samy SJ, an ordained Christian priest. The judges also noted that the trust's meditation centre displays a Christian cross prominently above a Buddha statue.

Court draws line between inclusive and exclusive faiths

In its detailed analysis of religious philosophy, the Bench drew a sharp distinction between different faith traditions. The court remarked that "unlike Hinduism which is inclusive, the Abrahamic religions are inherently exclusive".

The judges explained that devout followers of Abrahamic faiths—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—believe their holy texts represent the single complete revelation. Invoking the traditional proverb that "a leopard will not change its spots", the court addressed concerns raised regarding the adoption of local cultural symbols by messianic traditions.

However, the Bench emphasised that receiving foreign contributions is not an absolute or vested legal right, but merely a privilege subject to statutory compliance.

Foreign money and the risk of religious conversion

Addressing broader constitutional concerns, the High Court highlighted the statutory bar against foreign funding being deployed for religious conversion under Section 12(4)(a)(ii) of the FCRA. The judges stressed that these safeguards apply equally across all religious communities.

"A fundamentalist Hindu Organisation engaged in Ghar Wapsi cannot be registered under FCRA," the Bench stated. The court warned that unrestricted foreign funding aimed at proselytisation could endanger national sovereignty and disrupt social harmony. To describe India's diverse society, the judgment cited Justice Ruma Pal's metaphor of a "salad bowl" rather than a melting pot.

Significantly, the judges explicitly clarified that they were not accusing the Kanzeon trust of indulging in conversion activities, but were reinforcing the secular objectives built into the FCRA framework.

Indian knowledge systems differentiated from religious programmes

The High Court drew a clear legal boundary between religious activities and Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS). It held that institutions systematically teaching Vedanta, the Bhagavad Gita, the Upanishads, and Yoga through structured courses should be classified as educational or cultural bodies, in line with the National Education Policy 2020.

Concluding the judgment, the Bench held that the Ministry of Home Affairs was fully justified in rejecting the application due to improper disclosure. Ending with a play on the priest's name, the court remarked that the authority had to say "'Illa Samy' (No Sir) to Rev. Fr. Ama Samy".