Supreme Court remarks on challenges to religious practices

PTI, May 7, 2026, New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday remarked that if individuals start questioning certain religious practices or matters of religion before a constitutional court, then there will be hundreds of petitions questioning different rituals, leading to the breaking of religions and civilisation.

The nine-judge Constitution bench is hearing petitions related to discrimination against women at religious places, including the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, and on the ambit and scope of the religious freedom practised by multiple faiths, including Dawoodi Bohras.

The bench comprises Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices B V Nagarathna, M M Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Augustine George Masih, Prasanna B Varale, R Mahadevan and Joymalya Bagchi.

The Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community filed a PIL in 1986 seeking the setting aside of a 1962 judgment, which had struck down the Bombay Prevention of Excommunication Act, 1949 — this law made excommunication of any community member illegal.

The 1962 Constitution bench judgment said: "It is evident from the religious faith and tenets of the Dawoodi Bohra community that the exercise of the power of excommunication by its religious head on religious grounds formed part of the management of its affairs in matters of religion and the 1949 Act, in making even such excommunication invalid, infringed the right of the community under Article 26(b) of the Constitution."

Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, representing a group of reformist Dawoodi Bohras, submitted that a practice which is conducted in response to secular and social actions of an individual cannot be the subject of Constitutional protection under Article 25 of the Constitution and consequently cannot be a 'matter of religion' under Article 26 of the Constitution.

Ramachandran told the court that a practice which may have a religious aspect but also significantly and adversely impacts fundamental rights is not immune to restriction under Article 25 of the Constitution or Article 26 of the Constitution.

Responding to the submission, Justice Nagarathna said that if everybody starts questioning certain religious practices or matters of religion before a constitutional court, then "what happens to this civilisation where religion is so intimately connected with the Indian society".

"There will be hundreds of petitions questioning this right, that right, opening of the temple, and the closure of the temple. We are conscious of this," she said.