The Essential Religious Practices test is a doctrine in search of its own limits
This article is critical for UPSC Mains as it examines the evolution and constitutional validity of the Essential Religious Practices (ERP) test—a doctrine central to India's fundamental rights jurisprudence under Articles 25-26. The piece traces the doctrine's journey from the modest Shirur Mutt case (1954) through Venkataramana Devaru (1958) to its current confrontation with constitutional morality. For prelims, the landmark cases cited (Shirur Mutt, Sabarimala 2018, Navtej Johar 2018) and the textual architecture of Article 25(1) being subject to Articles 14, 15, and 21 are testable. The ongoing nine-judge bench hearing represents the most significant constitutional development on religious freedom in decades, making this essential for both state PSCs (OPSC, BPSC) and UPSC aspirants covering federalism, secularism, and judicial review.
- The nine-judge Constitution Bench in Kantaru Rajeevaru v Indian Young Lawyers' Association is hearing the Sabarimala review, inheriting a 70-year-old judicial doctrine on Essential Religious Practices (ERP)
- The ERP doctrine originated in Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Shirur Mutt (1954), where the Court ruled that freedom of religion under Article 25 covers both belief and practice
- In Sri Venkataramana Devaru v. State of Mysore (1958), Justice Venkatarama Aiyar established the Court's role in determining what constitutes 'essential' practice, moving away from complete deference to religious communities