20.Essential Religious Practice (ERP) and Article 26-30 Flashcards
What was the key issue in the case of The State of Bombay Vs Narasu Appa Mali?
The key issue in this case was the challenge to a Hindu bigamy prohibition law on the grounds that it violated the fundamental right to equality under the Constitution, as it only prohibited Hindu men from committing bigamy, but not Muslim men.
What was the decision of the Bombay High Court in the Narasu Appa Mali case?
The two-judge bench of the Bombay High Court held that personal laws could not be invalidated by courts, even if they are found to be opposed to fundamental rights. They ruled that personal laws were not “laws in force” as defined by Article 13 of the Constitution and were therefore immune from constitutional challenge.
Which case upheld the Narasu judgment of the Bombay High Court in 1980?
The Narasu judgment was upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of Sri Krishna Singh v Mathura Ahir in 1980.
Did the Supreme Court overturn the Narasu rationale in a judgment in 1996?
In a judgment in 1996 (C Masilamani Mudaliar and Others v The Idol of Swaminathaswami Thirukoil), it seemed as if the Court had implicitly overturned the Narasu rationale, stating that personal laws would be void if they violated fundamental rights.
What was the Court’s decision in the Ahmedabad Women’s Action Group v Union of India case in 1997?
In the Ahmedabad Women’s Action Group case in 1997, the Supreme Court once again upheld the Narasu judgment and dismissed a petition challenging various provisions of Hindu, Muslim, and Christian personal laws. The Court applied the “Essential Religious Practices” doctrine and protected practices and beliefs considered integral to a religious community under Article 25.
How is an essential religious practice defined?
An essential religious practice is a practice that is time immemorial and considered fundamental to the basic principles of a religion.
What is the mandate of the state regarding religious affairs according to the Indian Constitution?
The Indian Constitution combines the freedom of religion with a mandate for the state to intervene in religious affairs if it is necessary for social welfare.
What is meant by the term “Judicial Papacy” in the context of deciding the doctrine of Essential Religious Practices?
“Judicial Papacy” refers to the criticism that the courts, when deciding on matters of religion, are assuming the role of religious authorities or clergy.
What was the observation made by Australia’s High Court in the case of Adelaide Co. of Jehovah’s Witnesses Inc. v Commonwealth (1943)?
The High Court observed that “What is a religion to one is superstition to another.” It emphasized that the law and the state should not dictate what is essential or non-essential in a religion, and that the judiciary should not take on the role of the clergy.
According to the Shirur Mutt Case (1954), how is an essential part of religion determined?
The Court stated that an essential part of religion is ascertained with reference to the tenets and doctrines of that religion itself.
What autonomy does a religious denomination or organization enjoy, according to the Shirur Mutt Case?
The Shirur Mutt Case established that a religious denomination or organization has complete autonomy in determining what rites and ceremonies are essential according to the tenets of their religion.
What was the Court’s decision regarding the Tandava dance in the Anand Margi Case?
The Court concluded that the Tandava dance was not an essential practice of the Ananda Margi faith, based on the doctrine of precedent and the fact that the faith existed before adopting the practice.
In the Ismail Faruqi Case (1994), what did the Court rule about praying in a mosque in Islam?
The Court ruled that while praying is an essential practice in Islam, the offering of prayers in a mosque is not considered essential unless the place has a particular religious significance in itself.
What was the Supreme Court’s decision regarding animal sacrifice during the festival of Kulu Dushara?
The Supreme Court refused to quash the order of the Himachal Pradesh High Court that banned animal sacrifice during the festival of Kulu Dushara and in other religious rituals of the Kulu region of the state.
What happened when a public interest litigation sought a ban on the practice of killing animals in the name of religion?
The Supreme Court refused to entertain the public interest litigation that sought a ban on the practice of killing animals in the name of religion.
What was the restriction imposed by the Sabarimala shrine in Kerala?
The Sabarimala shrine in Kerala restricted women of menstruating age from entering the temple.
Who challenged the restriction on women’s entry into the Sabarimala temple?
A group of five women lawyers moved the Supreme Court challenging the decision of the Kerala High Court which upheld the centuries-old restriction.
What were the two claimed rights in the Haji Ali and Sabarimala case?
The two claimed rights were the constitutional right of women to worship under Article 25(1) and the right of the religious denomination to manage its own affairs under Article 26(b).
What principle did the Court rely on to decide on the exclusion of women from temples and mosques?
The Court relied on the equality and discrimination principle to decide that the exclusion of women from temples and mosques is an infringement of their fundamental rights.
How did the Supreme Court rule in the Haji Ali and Sabarimala case?
The Supreme Court, in a 4:1 majority verdict, held that the restriction on women’s entry into the Sabarimala Temple is unconstitutional. It violated the fundamental rights to equality, liberty, and freedom of religion.
What did the Supreme Court strike down in the Haji Ali and Sabarimala case?
The Supreme Court struck down Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship Act as unconstitutional. Rule 3(b) allowed for Hindu denominations to exclude women from public places of worship based on ‘custom’.
What did the Supreme Court clarify in its judgment regarding the treatment of women as impure?
The Supreme Court made it clear in its judgment that considering women impure comes within the ambit of Article 17, which deals with the abolition of untouchability.
Who filed the public interest litigation in the Nikhil Soni Case?
Jaipur-based lawyer Mr. Nikhil Soni filed the public interest litigation in the Nikhil Soni Case.
What did Nikhil Soni seek in the case?
Nikhil Soni sought directions under Article 226 to the Central and State governments to treat Santhara, the fast unto death practiced by Jains, as illegal.
What was the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court regarding the practice of Santhara?
The Rajasthan High Court judgment called Jainism’s centuries-old ‘Santhara or Sallekhaan’ custom an attempt to suicide and banned the practice.
What was the Supreme Court’s decision in the Nikhil Soni Case?
The Supreme Court reversed the ban on the practice of Santhara.
What did the Supreme Court say about Indian Secularism in the case?
The Supreme Court held that Indian Secularism allows the intervention of the state in matters of religion when general social welfare or substantial civil liberties are at stake.
According to the Supreme Court, can the courts determine which beliefs and practices are essential to the following of religion?
No, the Supreme Court stated that the Constitution does not permit the courts to tell us which of our beliefs and practices are essential to the following of religion.
What did the Court hold regarding the use of a loudspeaker in the Azan Case and Church of God Case?
The Court held that the use of a loudspeaker is not an essential religious practice.
What were the issues discussed in the Shayara Bano Judgment?
The issues of Triple Talaq, Polygamy, and Nikah Halala were discussed in the Shayara Bano Judgment.
