“The essential religious practices test undermines both secularism and religious autonomy”. Critically examine this statement. Analyse the practical and doctrinal difficulties inherent in the test. Suggest an alternative constitutional framework.

Topic: Indian Constitution- historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure Topic: Indian Constitution- historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure

Q3. “The essential religious practices test undermines both secularism and religious autonomy”. Critically examine this statement. Analyse the practical and doctrinal difficulties inherent in the test. Suggest an alternative constitutional framework. (15 M)

Difficulty Level: Difficult

Reference: TH

Why the question The reconsideration of the Sabarimala verdict has reignited constitutional debate on the scope of religious freedom under Articles 25–26 and the continuing relevance of the essential religious practices doctrine. Key Demand of the question The question requires a critical examination of whether the essential religious practices test undermines secularism and religious autonomy, an analysis of its doctrinal and practical weaknesses, and a suggestion of an alternative constitutional framework. Structure of the Answer: Introduction Briefly situate the essential religious practices doctrine within India’s model of principled secularism and the constitutional tension between religious autonomy and equality. Body Critical examination of the statement: Suggest presenting arguments that the doctrine leads to judicial theological scrutiny and restricts denominational autonomy, while also briefly noting counter-arguments that it protects core religious freedom from excessive State interference. Practical and doctrinal difficulties: Indicate concerns such as absence of objective criteria, evidentiary limitations in constitutional adjudication, inconsistency in application and conflict with dignity under Articles 14 and 21. Alternative constitutional framework: Suggest a shift towards dignity-centred approaches such as the anti-exclusion test or proportionality-based balancing rooted in constitutional morality rather than theological essentiality. Conclusion Conclude with a forward-looking note on harmonising faith autonomy with transformative constitutionalism while preserving secular judicial reasoning. Why the question The reconsideration of the Sabarimala verdict has reignited constitutional debate on the scope of religious freedom under Articles 25–26 and the continuing relevance of the essential religious practices doctrine.

Key Demand of the question The question requires a critical examination of whether the essential religious practices test undermines secularism and religious autonomy, an analysis of its doctrinal and practical weaknesses, and a suggestion of an alternative constitutional framework.

Structure of the Answer:

Introduction Briefly situate the essential religious practices doctrine within India’s model of principled secularism and the constitutional tension between religious autonomy and equality.

• Critical examination of the statement: Suggest presenting arguments that the doctrine leads to judicial theological scrutiny and restricts denominational autonomy, while also briefly noting counter-arguments that it protects core religious freedom from excessive State interference. • Practical and doctrinal difficulties: Indicate concerns such as absence of objective criteria, evidentiary limitations in constitutional adjudication, inconsistency in application and conflict with dignity under Articles 14 and 21. • Alternative constitutional framework: Suggest a shift towards dignity-centred approaches such as the anti-exclusion test or proportionality-based balancing rooted in constitutional morality rather than theological essentiality. Conclusion Conclude with a forward-looking note on harmonising faith autonomy with transformative constitutionalism while preserving secular judicial reasoning.