AN ANALYTICAL STUDY OF THE SCOPE OF ARTICLE 25 IN SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE ESSENTIAL RELIGIOUS PRACTICE TEST

Abstract

Article 25 of the Constitution of India provides to all persons equally entitled to freedom of Conscience and guaranteeing to freely profess, practise and propagate religion. Recently the striking example on the scope of Article 25 decided by the Karnataka High Court in the case of Smt. Resham versus State of Karnataka (W.P. no. 2347 of 2022). While deciding the petition seeking to lay a challenge to the insistence of certain educational institutions that no girl should wear the hijab (Headscarf) whilst in the classroom. The Hon’ble High Court framed the issue on the same and relied upon the Shirur Mutt Case whereby the apex court propounded the essential practice test. The high court decided in negative in her ratio decidendi stated the fact that restriction on the hijab was a reasonable and constitutionally permissible one that student could not object to. This test has been criticized on various ground as arbitrary, illegal, irrelevant etc and questioning the role of apex court on what factor determining the essential and non-essential religious practice. This article aims to explain the scope of article 25 and the essential religious practice test through various judgments. This study will also explore the other secular test such as reasonable restriction would have been adhered to evolve test.