Article 28 of Indian Constitution Part2

Summary

This video explores the 'essential religious practices' (ERP) test in India, which determines the limits of constitutionally protected religious practices. It discusses how the Supreme Court's interpretations, including the Aisha Shifa case on hijab in schools, have shaped religious freedom. The ERP test, influenced by BR Ambedkar, allows state intervention in non-intimate religious matters. The video examines legal precedents, societal implications, and the judiciary's role in a diverse society.

Takeaways

• 📜 The video discusses the Essential Religious Practices (ERP) test in the context of Article 28 of the Indian Constitution and the right to religion.
• 🌟 Religious freedom is considered crucial for fostering religious reform and achieving social harmony in India.
• 🏛 The ERP test, established by the Supreme Court of India, helps determine which religious practices are essential and thus constitutionally protected.
• 📚 Landmark cases like the Shirur Mutt case and Ratilal Pant Gandhi case have shaped the ERP test.
• 👳‍♀️ The 2022 Aisha Shifa versus State of Karnataka case dealt with the wearing of hijabs in educational institutions, sparking debates on religious freedom and individual choice.
• 🏫 The Karnataka High Court ruled that wearing a hijab is not an essential practice in Islam, thus not infringing on the right to freedom of religion.
• 📖 The court also stated that classrooms are public spaces where individual rights may be limited for the sake of general discipline and decorum.
• 🚫 The ban on hijabs was not considered discriminatory by the court, as it was based on a uniform dress code policy.
• 🤔 The case has reignited discussions on the ERP test and its application in modern legal interpretations.
• 🏛 The Supreme Court's interpretation of the right to religion is an evolving process that impacts the social and cultural fabric of India.
• 🌐 The judiciary plays a pivotal role in balancing individual rights with the principles of secularism in a diverse and pluralistic society.

Q & A

What is the significance of Article 28 of the Indian Constitution in the context of religious freedom?

Article 28 of the Indian Constitution is significant as it prohibits religious institutions from being taken over by the state or any other agency, thereby ensuring the autonomy of religious practices and institutions, which is a continuation of the religious freedom guaranteed by Article 25.

How does religious freedom contribute to fostering religious reform and social harmony?

Religious freedom is essential for fostering religious reform and social harmony because it allows individuals to explore their conscience, pursue the truth, and engage in an organic process of religious evolution. Greater freedom for religious and identity-based groups helps prevent repression, which often leads to violence.

What is the essential religious practices (ERP) test and how was it established by the Indian Supreme Court?

The essential religious practices (ERP) test is a legal framework established by the Indian Supreme Court to determine which religious practices are fundamental to a faith and thus deserving of constitutional protection. It was established through landmark cases and involves assessing the limits of the right to religion as guaranteed by the Constitution.

What are some landmark cases that have shaped the ERP test in India?

Landmark cases that have shaped the ERP test in India include the Shirur Mut case and Ratilal Panthji Gandhi case, which have been instrumental in defining the scope of religious practices that are considered essential and therefore protected under the Constitution.

What was the controversy surrounding the wearing of hijab in educational institutions as mentioned in the script?

The controversy involved Muslim students in Karnataka who were denied entry into classes for wearing the hijab, which was against the college's uniform policy. This led to a legal dispute where the Karnataka High Court ruled that wearing a hijab is not an essential practice in Islam and that the ban did not infringe upon the right to freedom of religion.

What were the three pivotal findings of the Karnataka High Court in the hijab case?

The three pivotal findings were: 1) Wearing a hijab is not an essential practice in Islam, 2) There is no substantive right to freedom of expression or privacy within the classroom as it is a qualified public space, and 3) The ban on hijab did not discriminate against Muslim students and was a result of the government's order for a uniform dress code.

How does the ERP test relate to BR Ambedkar's arguments in the Constituent Assembly?

The ERP test is rooted in BR Ambedkar's arguments which allow the state to intervene in matters connected to religion but not in those that are intrinsically religious. This principle guides the test in determining the constitutionality of religious practices.

What was the outcome of the appeal in the B Immanuel versus state of Kerala case?

In the B Immanuel versus state of Kerala case, the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict, with neither judge employing the established ERP test. This departure from jurisprudence was notable, especially in Justice Dulas' opinion, where he explicitly dispensed with the ERP test when individual rights were curtailed by state regulation.

What are the broader implications of the Supreme Court's interpretations of the right to religion on Indian society?

The Supreme Court's interpretations of the right to religion have profound implications for the social and cultural fabric of India. These decisions influence societal attitudes and contribute to the discourse on secularism, tolerance, diversity, and coexistence, shaping the contours of these values within a pluralistic society.

How does the ERP test contribute to the jurisprudential legacy of religious freedom in India?

The ERP test contributes to the jurisprudential legacy of religious freedom in India by providing a framework for courts to evaluate the constitutionality of religious practices. Each legal episode involving the ERP test adds to the understanding and application of religious freedom, balancing individual rights with societal norms and secular principles.

Outlines

00:00

📚 The Evolution of the Essential Religious Practices (ERP) Test

The video begins by explaining how religious freedom is rooted in the dignity of individuals to pursue their own beliefs and how this freedom is crucial for fostering social harmony. It then transitions to discussing the narrowing of religious freedom in India by the Supreme Court through the introduction of the Essential Religious Practices (ERP) test. This test determines which religious practices are essential to a faith and deserving of constitutional protection. The speaker references landmark cases like the Shirur Mutt and Ratilal Gandhi cases, as well as the 2022 Aisha Shifa case on the wearing of hijab in Karnataka schools. These cases illustrate how the ERP test has evolved and its societal implications.

05:01

⚖️ The Karnataka Hijab Case: Freedom of Religion in Question

The paragraph focuses on the Aisha Shifa vs. State of Karnataka case in 2022, where the issue of wearing hijabs in educational institutions was raised. The Karnataka government enforced a uniform dress code, which led to the exclusion of Muslim students who wore hijabs. The Karnataka High Court ruled that wearing a hijab was not an essential practice in Islam, thereby dismissing claims of religious infringement. The court also emphasized that classrooms are public spaces where individual rights, such as freedom of expression and privacy, are secondary to discipline and decorum. The judgment further fueled debates on religious freedom and the applicability of the ERP test.

🔍 Re-evaluating the ERP Test: Legal Precedents and Future Implications

This paragraph delves into the historical and legal analysis of the ERP test, including a reference to the B. Emmanuel vs. State of Kerala (1986) case. Here, students were allowed to abstain from singing the national anthem due to religious reasons, marking a departure from the ERP test. The split verdict and the absence of the ERP test in judicial decisions indicated that the test might not always be applicable. The ongoing case discussions open avenues for the Supreme Court to reassess or limit the ERP test's scope. The text also addresses the broader societal implications, such as how these legal rulings impact religious tolerance and diversity in India.

🛤️ The Supreme Court’s Ongoing Role in Balancing Secularism and Religious Freedom

The conclusion highlights the evolving nature of the Supreme Court’s interpretation of religious freedom under Article 25 to 27. Each ruling, especially with the use of the ERP test, contributes to the jurisprudential legacy of religious freedom in India. The speaker underscores how the judiciary plays a pivotal role in safeguarding individual rights while balancing the principles of secularism. The societal and cultural consequences of these rulings are significant, shaping India’s pluralistic and diverse landscape. The video ends by summarizing how jurisprudence is continuously evolving in this area, emphasizing the judiciary's responsibility in maintaining this delicate balance.

Keywords

💡Article 28

Article 28 of the Indian Constitution is a legal provision that safeguards the right of every religious denomination or any section thereof to manage its own affairs in matters of religion. In the video, it is mentioned as a continuation of the discussion on religious freedom, emphasizing its role in the broader context of constitutionally guaranteed rights.

💡Religious Freedom

Religious freedom refers to the right of individuals to hold and manifest their religious beliefs without interference from the state or other groups. The video discusses how religious freedom is foundational for fostering religious reform and achieving social harmony, and it is a key theme throughout the discussion.

💡Essential Religious Practices (ERP) Test

The ERP test is a legal framework established by the Indian Supreme Court to determine which religious practices are essential to a faith and thus deserve constitutional protection. The video uses this test to analyze how the scope of religious freedom has been interpreted and sometimes narrowed by the judiciary.

💡Shirur Mut Case

The Shirur Mut Case is a landmark legal case that shaped the ERP test. In the video, it is mentioned as instrumental in defining the limits of religious practices that are considered essential and therefore constitutionally protected.

💡Ratilal Pant Gandhi Case

Similar to the Shirur Mut Case, the Ratilal Pant Gandhi Case is another significant case that contributed to the development of the ERP test. The video highlights its role in shaping the legal understanding of religious practices.

💡Hijab

Hijab is a head covering worn by some Muslim women as a symbol of modesty and religious belief. The video discusses a recent controversy where Muslim students were denied entry into classes for wearing hijabs, which led to legal debates over religious freedom and individual choice.

💡Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court is a state-level court in India that made pivotal findings in the hijab controversy case. The video references its judgment, which concluded that wearing a hijab is not an essential practice in Islam and thus does not infringe on the right to freedom of religion.

💡Uniform Dress Code

Uniform dress codes are rules that require students to wear specific attire to maintain a standardized appearance in educational institutions. The video discusses how such codes were enforced in Karnataka, leading to the hijab controversy and subsequent legal challenges.

💡Aisha Shifa Versus State of Karnataka

Aisha Shifa Versus State of Karnataka is a case mentioned in the video where the court had to address the issue of wearing hijabs in educational institutions. It exemplifies the ongoing legal discourse on balancing religious freedom with institutional rules.

💡Secularism

Secularism is the principle of separation of government institutions and persons mandated to represent the state from religious institutions and religious dignitaries. The video touches on how the interpretations of religious freedom by the Supreme Court influence the secular fabric of Indian society.

💡Jurisprudence

Jurisprudence refers to the study of law and the theory and philosophy of law. In the context of the video, it is used to describe the evolving legal interpretations of the right to religion under Articles 25 to 27 of the Indian Constitution and their impact on society.

Highlights

Religious freedom is based on the belief in human dignity and the pursuit of truth.

Religious freedom is crucial for fostering religious reform and social harmony.

The Indian Supreme Court has introduced the essential religious practices (ERP) test to interpret the right to religion.

The ERP test determines which religious practices are essential and deserve constitutional protection.

Landmark cases like the Shabara Temple Entry Case and the Hijab controversy have shaped the ERP test.

The right to religion is enshrined in Article 25 of the Indian Constitution.

Judicial decisions have evolved the interpretation of the right to religion in India.

The Aisha Shifa versus State of Karnataka case dealt with the wearing of hijab in educational institutions.

The Karnataka High Court ruled that wearing a hijab is not an essential practice in Islam.

The court found no substantive right to freedom of expression or privacy within the classroom.

The ban on hijab was not found to be discriminatory against Muslim students.

The case reignited discussions on the applicability of the ERP test.

The Supreme Court's interpretation of the right to religion extends beyond legal principles to social and cultural implications.

The ERP test allows the state to intervene in matters connected to religion but not intrinsically religious.

The B Immanuel versus State of Kerala case allowed students to abstain from singing the National Anthem due to religious beliefs.

The Supreme Court's decision in the B Immanuel case did not employ the ERP test.

The matter now awaits consideration by a larger bench, potentially re-evaluating the ERP test.

The ERP test has faced criticism from legal scholars.

The Judiciary plays a pivotal role in safeguarding individual rights within a diverse and pluralistic society.

The interpretation of the right to religion is a nuanced and continually evolving process in India.

Transcripts

dear students as a continuation of

Article 28 of the Indian constitution in

this video we will examine the essential

religious practices Erp test as

enshrined within the right to religion

as emphasized in our previous videos

religious freedom is predicated on the

belief that every human being possesses

inherent dignity to explore their

conscience and pursue the truth

religious freedom is indispensable for

fostering religious reform as without

organic process religions and the

societies they deeply influence can

become stunted therefore greater freedom

for religions and identity based groups

is crucial for achieving social harmony

whereas repression often leads to

violence having discussed the importance

and inherent social value of freedom in

matters relating to religion in earlier

videos particularly focusing on articles

25 to 28 this video lecture aims to

examine how Indian Supreme Court has

narrowed the scope of the

constitutionally guaranteed freedom of

religion by introducing the essentiality

test the interpretation of the right to

religion by the Supreme Court of India

has evolved marked by landmark cases

such as the essential religious

practices heing after Erp test the

shabala temple entry case and recent

controversies surrounding the wearing of

hijab this comprehensive analysis will

look into the historical context legal

precedence and broader societal

implications of the Supreme Court's

interpretations of right to religion the

right to religion is enshrined in the

Indian constitution under article 25

guaranteeing freedom of conscience and

right to freely profess practice and

propagate religion the interpretation of

this right has evolved through judicial

decisions contributing to

jurisprudential landscape the Erp test

established by the Supreme Court serves

as a crucial framework for assessing the

limits of right to religion this test

involves determining which religious

practices are essential to a particular

faith and therefore deserving of

constitutional protection I had already

mentioned in my previous videos that

cases like shirur mut case and ratilal

pant Gandhi case have played

instrumental roles in shaping the Erp

test today's video also deals with Aisha

shifa versus state of Karnataka and

others the 2022 case judgment that dealt

with wearing of hijab in educational

institutions and the debates involving

religious freedom individual choice and

the authority of educational

institutions to regulate the dress codes

within Erp test so let's understand what

has been the facts and the Judgment in

the case the dispute emanated from a

policy clash in Karnataka where Muslim

Students deciding to wear the hijab

where denied entry into the classes

citing a violation of the college

uniform policy the Karnataka government

mandated the compulsory wearing of

uniforms with no exceptions citing a

uniform dress code as a result several

educational institutions enforced this

order leading to petitions filed in

kataka high court on behalf of the

affected students in its judgment the k

High Court made three pivotal findings

firstly it held that wearing a hijab is

not an essential practice in Islam thus

concluding that the right to freedom of

religion was not infringed secondly the

Court ruled that within the classroom

there is no substantive right to freedom

of expression or privacy as classrooms

are deemed qualified public spaces where

individual rights yield to the interest

of a general discipline and decorum

thirdly the court concluded that the ban

on hijab did not directly emulate from

the government's order avoiding

discrimination against Muslim Students

the case further reignited the

discussions on the Erp test this test

rooted in BR ambedkar's arguments in the

constituent assembly allows the state to

intervene in matters connected to

religion but not intrinsically

religious examining the past

interpretations on the Erp test the

court also examined the Judgment

provided in B Immanuel versus state of

Kerala 1986 SC

3518 where the students were allowed to

abstain from singing the National Anthem

due to conflict in religious beliefs the

matter when it went as an appeal to the

Supreme Court the division bench

delivered a split verdict what makes

this case even more compelling is that

neither the judge employed the

established essential religious practice

test as usual standard in matters

concerning freedom of religion this

departure from established jurisprudence

is particularly notable in Justice Dulas

op opinion where he explicitly dispensed

with the Erp test when an individual's

rights were curtailed by a state

regulation as a matter now awaits

consideration by a larger bench it opens

a fresh Avenue for the Supreme Court to

re-evaluate or limit the applicability

of Erp test a standard that has faced

critic from legal

Scholars the interpretation of the right

to religion extends Beyond legal

principles it has profound implications

for social cultural fabric of India

Supreme Court decisions influence

societal attributes and attitudes

shaping the Contour of Tolerance

diversity and

coexistence understanding how these

legal interpretations resonate within

communities and contributing to larger

discourse on secularism and individual

freedoms is integral to a comprehensive

understanding in conclusion I would like

to highlight that the Supreme Court's

interpretation of right to religion is a

nuanced and continually evolved process

with the Erp test each legal episode

contributes to the jurisprudential

legacy of religious freedom in India

this analysis navigates the historical

trajectory legal intricacies and

societal Ramic ifications of these

interpretations highlighting the

delicate yet pivotal role of the

Judiciary in safeguarding individual

rights within the framework of a diverse

and pluralistic society hope you all

understood the concept clearly and how

Juris Prudence is evolving under right

to religion under article 25 to 27

simultaneously balancing secularism

principle thank you