Article 26

Article 26 of the Constitution of India guarantees every religious denomination or section thereof the right to manage its own affairs in matters of religion. It is a vital provision that upholds the autonomy of religious communities while maintaining a balance between religious freedom and constitutional order. This Article ensures that the State respects the independence of religious institutions, even as it retains the power to regulate them in the interest of public order, morality, and health.

Constitutional Context and Scope

Article 26 falls within Part III – Fundamental Rights, under the broader heading of the Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25–28). While Article 25 protects the rights of individuals to profess and practise their faith, Article 26 extends similar protection to religious denominations as collective entities.
This Article plays a pivotal role in maintaining India’s secular character, guaranteeing equal respect and protection to all religions without favour or interference, except where public interest demands otherwise.
The text of Article 26 provides that, subject to public order, morality, and health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right:(a) to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes;(b) to manage its own affairs in matters of religion;(c) to own and acquire movable and immovable property; and(d) to administer such property in accordance with law.
These rights together create a framework for religious self-governance, preserving the internal autonomy of religious communities.

Rights Guaranteed Under Article 26

1. Right to Establish and Maintain InstitutionsReligious denominations are entitled to establish institutions for religious and charitable purposes, including temples, mosques, churches, monasteries, schools, and hospitals. This enables religious groups to organise and promote their beliefs while contributing to social welfare and education.
2. Right to Manage Religious AffairsReligious denominations have the autonomy to conduct their internal affairs without external interference. This includes the performance of rituals, observance of customs, and administration of religious ceremonies in accordance with established traditions. However, the State retains the authority to intervene when such practices threaten public order or violate constitutional morality.
3. Right to Own and Acquire PropertyReligious bodies are permitted to acquire, hold, and possess both movable and immovable property essential for carrying out their religious and charitable activities. This right ensures the material foundation necessary for sustaining religious institutions and services.
4. Right to Administer PropertyWhile religious groups have the right to administer their properties, this administration must conform to laws enacted by the State. The State can regulate property management to ensure transparency, accountability, and prevention of misuse or misappropriation of assets. Regulation of secular activities, such as financial management or property control, does not infringe upon the core religious freedom guaranteed under Article 26.

Key Terms and Concepts

• Religious Denomination:A religious denomination refers to an organised group within a religion that shares a common faith, name, and distinctive religious practices. The Supreme Court in The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt (1954) defined a denomination as a collection of individuals identified by a common faith and organisational identity distinct from the larger religion.
• Public Order, Morality, and Health:These are constitutional limitations imposed to ensure that religious freedom does not undermine the welfare of society. If a practice contravenes laws protecting public order or health, or is deemed immoral, the State is empowered to regulate or prohibit it.

Judicial Interpretation and Landmark Cases

Judicial pronouncements have played a crucial role in interpreting the scope and meaning of Article 26, ensuring that it operates within the framework of constitutional values.

• The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt (1954):This landmark case, commonly known as the Shirur Mutt Case, laid the foundation for the interpretation of Article 26. The Supreme Court held that religious denominations have complete autonomy in deciding matters of religion. However, the Court distinguished between religious and secular activities, stating that while the former are protected, the latter can be regulated by the State.
• Durgah Committee, Ajmer v. Syed Hussain Ali (1961):The Court reiterated that Article 26 protects only those practices which are essential and integral to a religion. Activities that are purely secular or superstitious in nature may be excluded from constitutional protection.
• Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb v. State of Bombay (1962):The Supreme Court upheld the right of a religious leader to excommunicate members, recognising it as a matter of internal religious management protected under Article 26(b), though such power cannot override principles of justice and equality.
• M.S.M.S. v. State of Kerala (1970):The Court examined the regulation of religious property and upheld the State’s authority to oversee financial and administrative matters to prevent maladministration.
• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973):The judgment established the Basic Structure Doctrine, affirming that the freedom of religion under Articles 25 and 26 forms part of the Constitution’s unalterable basic structure.
• Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (2018):Commonly known as the Sabarimala Case, the Court ruled that religious freedom under Article 26 cannot override constitutional morality or gender equality. The judgment held that religious denominations must comply with fundamental rights, particularly the right to equality under Article 14.

Relationship with Other Articles

Article 26 functions alongside other provisions that collectively secure religious liberty:

• Article 25: Guarantees individual freedom of conscience and religion.
• Article 27: Prohibits the State from compelling citizens to pay taxes for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion.
• Article 28: Ensures freedom from religious instruction or worship in certain educational institutions.

Together, these Articles form the constitutional framework for religious freedom and secularism in India.

Limitations and State Regulation

While Article 26 provides autonomy to religious groups, its exercise is subject to reasonable restrictions. The State can regulate:

• Financial and administrative aspects of religious institutions.
• Practices that are exploitative, discriminatory, or detrimental to public welfare.
• Matters involving health and safety, such as animal sacrifices or public gatherings during pandemics.

However, the State cannot interfere in purely religious matters, such as rituals or ceremonies that are integral to faith. The distinction between essential religious practices and secular activities remains central to judicial interpretation.

Significance of Article 26

Article 26 serves as a cornerstone of India’s secular constitutional order. Its significance lies in the following aspects:

• Preservation of Religious Autonomy: Ensures that religious communities can govern their internal affairs without external intrusion.
• Balance Between Religion and State: Protects faith-based institutions while allowing regulation in the public interest.
• Promotion of Social Harmony: Recognises collective rights of religious groups, contributing to pluralism and peaceful coexistence.
• Support for Charitable and Educational Work: Encourages religious bodies to undertake philanthropic activities beneficial to society.

Contemporary Relevance

In modern India, Article 26 continues to be tested on issues such as gender justice, transparency in temple administration, and the management of religious endowments. Courts have increasingly emphasised constitutional morality—the idea that religious freedom must harmonise with equality, human dignity, and social reform.