A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, upheld the Constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act of 2004 on Tuesday, overturning a previous ruling by the Allahabad High Court.

In March, the Allahabad High Court had declared the Madarsa Act unconstitutional, arguing that it violated the principles of secularism. Following this, the Supreme Court issued a stay on the High Court's judgment in April, pending a review of the law's validity.

The Madarsa Act establishes a legal framework for madarsa education, which integrates both the curriculum prescribed by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) and religious education. The Act also created the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education, which is predominantly comprised of members from the Muslim community. According to Section 9 of the Act, the board is responsible for preparing course materials and conducting examinations for all educational levels, from 'Maulvi' (equivalent to Class 10) to 'Fazil' (equivalent to a Master's degree).

In defending the Act, the Uttar Pradesh government argued before the Supreme Court that it was constitutional and should not have been entirely struck down, suggesting that only specific provisions should have been scrutinized.

Chief Justice Chandrachud emphasized the state's interest in maintaining educational standards in religious institutions, stating, "You interpret it that way. But to throw out the Act is to throw the baby out with the bathwater." The Supreme Court also acknowledged that certain provisions of the 2004 Act, particularly those empowering the board to confer degrees such as Kamil and Fazil, might conflict with the University Grants Commission Act of 1956, which stipulates that only universities recognized under its statute can grant degrees.