Supreme Court Bench Hears Sabarimala Reference
Source:Indian Express ↗
Why It Matters
The Supreme Court's interpretation of Articles 25 and 26 will set a landmark precedent on the extent of state intervention in religious practices, profoundly impacting the balance between individual civil rights (such as gender equality) and the autonomy of religious denominations.
Summary
The Supreme Court's nine-judge bench has commenced hearings on the Sabarimala reference to resolve conflicts between religious freedom and fundamental rights. The deliberations focus on interpreting the scope of religious denominations to 'manage' versus 'control' their affairs under Article 26(b), the clash between constitutional morality and public/religious morality, and the application of Article 25(2) for social reform and temple entry. The broader reference also encompasses related practices like Female Genital Mutilation, evaluating them against the Fundamental Duty in Article 51A(e) to renounce practices derogatory to women's dignity.
Key Points
- The Supreme Court's nine-judge bench is examining the interplay between fundamental rights and religious freedoms (Articles 25 and 26) following the Sabarimala reference.
- A central question is the definition of 'manage' versus 'control' under Article 26(b), determining the extent of autonomy religious denominations have over their internal affairs.
- The concept of 'Constitutional morality' is being actively debated against 'public/religious morality' and traditional civilisational values.
- Article 25(2) is highlighted as a mechanism for social reform, echoing historical movements for temple entry led by figures like Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.
- The reference also covers other controversial practices like Female Genital Mutilation, which are being scrutinized against the Fundamental Duty under Article 51A(e) to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women.
Important Terms
Article 25
Guarantees all persons freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion. It allows State-led social reforms, such as opening temples to all sections of Hindus.
UPSC context
GS-II Fundamental Rights; tests the balance between individual religious liberty and the State's power to enact social welfare and reform.
Article 26
Grants religious denominations the right to establish institutions, manage their own religious affairs, and own property. These rights are subject to public order, morality, and health.
UPSC context
GS-II Polity; crucial for understanding group rights and the institutional autonomy of religious sects versus State regulation.
Constitutional Morality
A judicial principle prioritizing core values like equality, dignity, and justice over societal norms. It guides the interpretation of the Constitution to protect rights against majoritarian or religious morality.
UPSC context
GS-II Judiciary; vital for analyzing landmark judgments where fundamental rights clash with traditional or religious practices.
Essential Religious Practices (ERP) Doctrine
A judicial test used to determine which rituals or beliefs are "essential" to a religion. Only practices deemed integral receive constitutional protection under Articles 25 and 26.
UPSC context
GS-II Polity; evaluates judicial overreach and the Court's role in interpreting theology to resolve legal disputes.
Article 51A(e)
A Fundamental Duty requiring citizens to promote harmony and renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women. It is increasingly used by courts to evaluate religious traditions.
UPSC context
GS-II Fundamental Duties; relevant for issues involving gender justice and the legal standing of duties in protecting women's rights.
Prelims Trap
Article 26 grants religious denominations absolute rights to manage their affairs, free from state intervention.
Article 26 applies only to matters of religion, not secular administration. Furthermore, it is explicitly subject to public order, morality, and health.
Static Concepts Connected
What is the Essential Religious Practices (ERP) doctrine?
- Shirur Mutt origins: Formulated by the Supreme Court in the 1954 Shirur Mutt case to separate secular activities from core religious tenets.
- Core vs Peripheral: Only practices absolutely integral and essential to a religion receive constitutional protection under Articles 25 and 26.
- Judicial determination: The judiciary determines what is 'essential' by examining religious texts and historical evidence, not merely the claims of followers.
How does Article 25(2) empower the State in religious matters?
- Secular regulation: Article 25(2)(a) allows the State to regulate or restrict economic, financial, political, or other secular activities associated with religious practices.
- Social reform: Article 25(2)(b) explicitly enables the State to enact laws for social welfare and reform, overriding orthodox practices.
- Temple entry: It specifically mandates the opening of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.
Cross-Topic Patterns
Constitutional Morality and the UCC debate
The Sabarimala benchmark of prioritizing constitutional morality over orthodox religious morality forms the legal bedrock for arguments advocating a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) to achieve gender justice.
Fundamental Duties shaping Rights jurisprudence
Evaluating customs against Article 51A(e) (renouncing practices derogatory to women) demonstrates how courts actively use non-justiciable Fundamental Duties as interpretive tools to define the limits of Fundamental Rights.
Expect a Mains question on Constitutional Morality vs Religious Freedom, or a multi-statement Prelims MCQ on Article 25(2) exemptions.
Linked PYQs · 2
Linked PYQs · 2
- 2021MainsGS2
‘Constitutional Morality’ is rooted in the Constitution itself and is founded on its essential facets. Explain the doctrine of ‘Constitutional Morality’ with the help of relevant judicial decisions.
- 2025MainsGS2
"Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike...." In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept of constitutional morality and its application to ensure balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability in India.
