Supreme Court Bench Examines Power to Strike Down ‘Superstitious’ Religious Practices – Sabarimala Reference

Key Insight

Supreme Court says courts can curb superstitious rites that threaten public order

Key Facts

1. The Supreme Court's 9‑judge Constitution bench is hearing the Sabarimala Reference case (2026).
2. The bench observed that courts can strike down religious practices or superstitions that violate public order, morality or health.
3. Article 25(2)(b) of the Constitution authorises the State to make laws for social reform, including regulation of religion.
4. The "Essential Religious Practice" (ERP) doctrine requires the essentiality of a practice to be examined through the specific philosophical tenets of that religion.
5. The Union Government, through the Solicitor General, argued that defining "superstition" is a legislative function, citing the Ajmer Dargah Committee judgment.
6. The observation underscores that judicial review of religion is permissible when a practice is not protected as an essential belief.

Background

The issue sits at the intersection of Article 25 (freedom of religion) and the State's power to intervene for public welfare, a recurring theme in UPSC Polity. It also touches upon the doctrine of essentiality, which the Supreme Court uses to differentiate protected religious rites from reformable customs.

UPSC Syllabus

• Essay — Youth, Health and Welfare
• GS2 — Functions and responsibilities of Union and States
• Prelims_GS — Constitution and Political System

Mains Angle

GS II – "Discuss the balance between religious freedom and State intervention in India, with reference to the ERP doctrine and recent Supreme Court observations on superstitious practices."