Essential Religious Practices Doctrine: A Threat to Religious Pluralism?

This paper examines the Essential Religious Practices (ERP) doctrine and its impact on the constitutional value of religious pluralism in India. While the doctrine emerged as a judicial mechanism to balance religious autonomy with social reform under Articles 25 and 26, it has increasingly led to the standardization of religious belief. The research argues that the current judicial implementation of the ERP doctrine endangers pluralism by favouring orthodox, text-based interpretations over lived, syncretic, and evolving practices. Through a doctrinal and analytical methodology, the study scrutinizes landmark Supreme Court decisions- including Sabarimala, Shayara Bano, and the hijab case- to highlight inconsistencies in judicial reasoning and the problematic transformation of secular courts into theological adjudicators. The analysis reveals that the ERP framework often marginalizes minority voices, reinforces intra-religious power hierarchies, and conflicts with the principles of constitutional morality. The paper concludes that the ERP doctrine, in its present form, acts as a constraint on religious diversity rather than a safeguard. It proposes a shift toward a rights-based and dignity-oriented framework that prioritizes individual autonomy and the prevention of harm over the determination of theological essentiality. Such a reorientation is necessary to preserve the transformative promise of the Indian Constitution and ensure a truly pluralistic secular order.