Essential Religious Practices Doctrine
The Essential Religious Practices (ERP) doctrine, first articulated by the Supreme Court in the Shirur Mutt case (1954), holds that constitutional protection under Articles 25 and 26 extends only to practices that are "essential" or "integral" to a religion, as determined by the courts. The doctrine has been controversial because it requires secular courts to adjudicate on religious questions, determining what is "essential" to a faith. Critics argue this amounts to judicial overreach into theological matters.
- Origin: Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar (1954)
- Test: whether a practice is "essential" or "integral" to the religion, without which the religion would change character
- Applied in: Sabarimala (2018), triple talaq (2017), Ananda Marga tandava dance (2004)
- Criticism: courts lack competence to determine religious essentiality; risks majoritarian interpretation
- Alternative approaches proposed: "anti-exclusion" principle (Justice Chandrachud in Sabarimala)
- The nine-judge bench may reconsider the scope and applicability of the ERP doctrine
● Tracked since February 16, 2026 · last seen April 05, 2026 · updates as the daily brief publishes
See it in today’s brief.
Daily current affairs with every static concept explained in place.
Read the daily brief