The Hindu : National : Larger Bench to define what constitutes essential part of a religion

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, May 11, 2004

National

National

Larger Bench to define what constitutes essential part of a religion

By Our Legal Correspondent

NEW DELHI, MAY 10. A larger Bench of the Supreme Court will go into "what constitutes an essential part of a religion, with reference to a particular doctrine or religious practice followed by a particular community."

A Bench, consisting of the Chief Justice S. Rajendra Babu and Justice P. Venkatarama Reddi, hearing a petition seeking a review of its earlier judgment upholding the validity of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowment Act, 1987, which abolished the hereditary rights of archakas in temples, referred it to a larger Bench.

The Bench said that some of the observations under review were self-contradictory and the whole approach was influenced by the basic assumption that religion should be equated with "dharma," "while this court enunciated the principles as to what is protected under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution" relating to religious freedom.

The Act abolished all rights, whether hereditary, contractual or otherwise, of an archaka, a Mirasdar or a Matadhipati, or any other office-holder in any religious institution.

The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams challenged the provisions of the Act and the Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld it. On an appeal, the Supreme Court confirmed the order.

However, A. Ramaswamy Dikshitulu and others filed a review petition contending that "a religious denomination enjoys complete autonomy in the matter of deciding what rites and ceremonies are essential according to the tenets of the religion they hold and no outside authority has any jurisdiction to interfere with its decision in such matters."

Further, if the tenets of a particular religion required performance of certain rites and ceremonies at certain times and in a particular manner, these could not be treated as secular activities. Protection under Articles 25 and 26 was not confined to matters of doctrine or belief, but extended to acts done in pursuance of a religion.

They contained a guarantee for rituals and observances, ceremonies and modes of worship, which were an integral part of religion, it was submitted.

The Bench said: "Considering the nature of contentions, the scope and extent of the same, we think these are fit cases for consideration by a larger Bench and we refer accordingly."

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National

News Update

Stories in this Section

`Coalition dharma if Congress does not have majority on its own'

Advani, Jaswant meet Vajpayee

Behind-the-scenes bargaining begins

70 per cent polling in West Bengal; two killed

43.6 p.c. turnout in J&K

Women voters undeterred

One killed in Uttar Pradesh group clash

Larger Bench to define what constitutes essential part of a religion

Historic, says BJP

Armed forces to buy 42 HAL copters

SAHMAT condemns surrogate ad

Cyclonic storm weakens

Outsourcing is not a major issue, says U.S. expert

Moon mission attracts foreign proposals

Surjeet rules out third front