Relevance: GS-2: Indian Constitution- historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure.

Key Phrases: Freedom of Religion, Negative Liberty, Article 25(1), Essential Religious Practices, Judicial Overreach, reasonable accommodation

Why in News?

• The Madras High Court recently observed that rituals and observations prescribed under a religion that form an integral part of that religion are also covered under the freedom of religion enshrined under Article 25(1) of the Constitution.
• The court also stated that the right of worship guaranteed under the Constitution must be respected by all concerned and devotees cannot be denied their right of worship under any circumstances.

Essential Religious Practice Test (Doctrine of Essentiality):

• Essential religious practice test is a doctrine evolved by the Supreme Court (SC) to protect only such religious practices under fundamental rights, which are essential and integral to religion.
• The doctrine of “essentiality” was invented by a seven-judge Bench of the SC in the ‘Shirur Mutt’ case in 1954.
• The court then took the responsibility of determining the essential practices of religion upon itself.
• What constitutes an integral or essential part of religion has to be determined with reference to its doctrines, practices, tenets, historical background, etc. of the given religion.
• Essential part of religion means the core beliefs upon which a religion is founded. Essential practice means those practices that are fundamental to following a religious belief.
• It is upon the cornerstone of essential parts or practices that the superstructure of religion is built, without which religion will be no religion.
• Test to determine whether a part or practice is essential to a religion is to find out whether the nature of the religion will be changed without that part or practice.
• If the taking away of that part or practice could result in a fundamental change in the character of that religion or in its belief, then such part could be treated as an essential or integral part.
• There cannot be additions or subtractions to such part because it is the very essence of that religion and alterations will change its fundamental character. These permanent essential parts are protected by the Constitution.

Landmark Judgments:

• Shirur Mutt Case 1954:
  • In 1954, the Supreme Court held that the term “religion” will cover all rituals and practices “integral” to a religion. The test to determine what is integral is termed the “essential religious practices” test.
• Sri Venkataramana Devaru vs State of Mysore case, 1958,
  • The supreme court decision was on whether the restrictions on entry into temples for some sections, were “ essential part of the Hindu religion”.
  • It held that such practices are unconstitutional and void, and opened the temples for all Hindus.
• Bijoe Emmanuel and others vs. State of Kerala (1986)
  • Supreme Court ruled that even if a religious belief or practice does not appeal to anyone’s reason or sentiment it would attract the protection of Article 25 if it is genuinely and conscientiously held as part of the profession or practice of religion.
• Fathima Tasneem v State of Kerala (2018):
  • The case involved two girls who wanted to wear the headscarf. The school refused to allow the headscarf.
  • Kerala HC held that the collective rights of an institution would be given primacy over the individual rights of the petitioner
  • However, the court dismissed the appeal as students were no more in the rolls of the School.
• Ayodhya Case 2019:
  • The Supreme Court held that offering prayers was an essential practice of Islam, but offering prayers in the mosque was not essential practice.

Principle of Reasonable Accommodation:

• The principle of reasonable accommodation acknowledges that if disability as a social construct has to be remedied, conditions have to be affirmatively created for facilitating the development of the disabled.
• Reasonable accommodation is founded on the norm of inclusion.
• Exclusion results in the negation of individual dignity and worth or they can choose the route of reasonable accommodation, where each individual’s dignity and worth are respected.
• Under this route, the “powerful and the majority adapt their own rules and practices, within the limits of reason and short of undue hardship, to permit realization of these ends.”

Criticism of the Essential Features Test:

• Judicial Overreach: A judicial determination of religious practices that are considered essential, has often been criticized by legal experts as Judicial Overreach.
• Theological Side: It has been criticized by legal experts as it pushes the court to delve into theological aspects.
• Public Order: Legal experts have asked the courts to use the test to prohibit religious practices for public order rather than determine its essentiality in religion.
• Individual Freedom: There are instances in which the court has applied the test to individual freedoms as well. For example, in 2016, a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court upheld the discharge of a Muslim airman from the Indian Air Force for keeping a beard.
• It distinguished the case of a Muslim airman from that of Sikhs who are allowed to keep a beard.
• The court essentially held that keeping a beard was not an essential part of Islamic practices.

Way Forward:

• The court should pay attention to Justice R.F. Nariman’s dictum in the Sabarimala review which says, that the “holy book” of India is the Constitution of India.
• The basic idea of the constitution was to create a progressive and just society, which makes the higher judiciary duty-bound to strike down social evils present in religious practices. But while exercising this doctrine the court should keep in mind that religion is also a crucial aspect of human development and social harmony. Hence excessive interference shall be avoided.

Sources: Indian Express   The Hindu

Mains Question:

Q. Madras High Court recently observed that rituals and observations prescribed under a religion that form an integral part of that religion are also covered under the freedom of religion enshrined under Article 25(1) of the Constitution.
In this context discuss the method of classifying rituals as an integral part of the religion and doctrines related to it. Support your answer with suitable judgments and constitutional provisions.