In Shirur Mutt case (1954), Supreme Court (SC) has evolved the doctrine of essentiality, which of the following is/are the cases in which SC has applied this doctrine?

Acharya Jagdishwaranda Avadhuta & Others v, The commissioner of Police, Calcutta & Another.

Mohammed Zubair Corporal vs Union of India & Ors.

Sabarimala case.

Sunita Tiwari vs Union of India and Ors.

Choose the correct answer using the codes given below:

Question

Essential religious practice test is a doctrine evolved by the supreme court to protect only such religious practices under fundamental rights, which are essential and integral to religion. The doctrine of “essentiality” was invented by a seven-judge Bench of the SC in the ‘Shirur Mutt’ case in 1954. The court held that the term “religion” will cover all rituals and practices “integral” to a religion, and took upon itself the responsibility of determining the essential and non-essential practices of a religion.
Hence, some acts obtained constitutional protection by being declared “essential” to the practice of that religion and some were denied protection on the ground that they were not essential to it. Some cases where the court has applied the essentiality test are:
In Acharya Jagdishwaranda Avadhuta & Others v, The commissioner of Police, Calcutta & Another, (1983), SC held that Tandava dance in public is not an essential rite of Ananda Margi faith.
Discharging of a Muslim Airman from Airforce (2016) (Mohammed Zubair Corporal ... vs Union Of India & Ors)
Sabarimala Issue (2018)
‘Sunita Tiwari vs Union of India and Ors’, (Female genital mutation among Dawoodi Bohras)
‘Goolrukh Gupta vs Burjur Pardiwala’ (Entry of Parsi women married to non-Parsis in the Agyari)

GKToday Admin · Accepted Answer

1, 2, 3 & 4

Essential religious practice test is a doctrine evolved by the supreme court to protect only such religious practices under fundamental rights, which are essential and integral to religion. The doctrine of “essentiality” was invented by a seven-judge Bench of the SC in the ‘Shirur Mutt’ case in 1954. The court held that the term “religion” will cover all rituals and practices “integral” to a religion, and took upon itself the responsibility of determining the essential and non-essential practices of a religion.
Hence, some acts obtained constitutional protection by being declared “essential” to the practice of that religion and some were denied protection on the ground that they were not essential to it. Some cases where the court has applied the essentiality test are:
In Acharya Jagdishwaranda Avadhuta & Others v, The commissioner of Police, Calcutta & Another, (1983), SC held that Tandava dance in public is not an essential rite of Ananda Margi faith.
Discharging of a Muslim Airman from Airforce (2016) (Mohammed Zubair Corporal ... vs Union Of India & Ors)
Sabarimala Issue (2018)
‘Sunita Tiwari vs Union of India and Ors’, (Female genital mutation among Dawoodi Bohras)
‘Goolrukh Gupta vs Burjur Pardiwala’ (Entry of Parsi women married to non-Parsis in the Agyari)