- The doctrine originated in the Shirur Mutt case (1954) and has been refined through subsequent Supreme Court judgments.
- It is used to interpret and apply Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantee freedom of religion.
- The doctrine holds that only practices essential or integral to a religion are protected under constitutional religious freedom.
- Courts, rather than religious authorities, have the power to determine what constitutes an essential religious practice.
- Courts consider factors such as the practice’s antiquity, consistency, importance to the religion, and the consequences of its omission.
- Judges examine religious texts, doctrines, and historical practices to assess a practice’s essentiality.
- The doctrine aims to balance religious freedom with social reform and other constitutional principles.
- There has been a shift from a more subjective approach (based on community beliefs) to a more objective judicial assessment.
- The doctrine has been applied in significant cases like the Sabarimala temple entry, triple talaq, and hijab ban controversies.
- The doctrine faces criticism for potentially allowing judicial overreach into religious matters and for the challenges in applying a uniform test across diverse religious traditions
Dig Deeper: Read about various doctrines which are in news from time to time such as Doctrine of Pith and Substance, Doctrine of Eclipse etc.
