Ismail Faruqui v. Union of India
Easy English guide to Article 25 and the essential religious practices test in the context of the Ayodhya Acquisition Act, 1993.
Quick Summary
The Supreme Court upheld the Ayodhya Acquisition Act, 1993. It explained that Article 25 protects practices that are essential to a religion. Prayer is religious, but praying at every possible place is not automatically essential unless that place has special, integral religious value.
The Court said namaz can be offered anywhere. A mosque is not, by itself, indispensable to the practice for Article 25 in every situation.
Issues
- Is the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993 constitutionally valid?
- Does Article 25 protect only essential practices, or all practices followed by the faith?
Rules
- Article 25 & 26: Protect freedom of religion, subject to public order, morality, health, and other rights.
- Essential Practices Test: Only practices integral to a religion get constitutional protection as “essential”. Place-based worship is protected only when that place is integral to the faith.
Facts (Timeline)
Arguments
Petitioners
- The acquisition infringes religious freedom by affecting a place of worship.
- Worship at the site is a protected religious practice.
- The Act violates the secular character of the State.
Union of India
- The Act aims to calm communal tension and manage the area lawfully.
- Only essential practices get Article 25 protection; namaz is not location-bound.
- Acquisition, per se, is secular and within Parliament’s power.
Judgment
A five-judge Bench, by majority, upheld the Ayodhya Acquisition Act. The Court said the State can take steps to reduce communal tension without being “non-secular”. It clarified that namaz can be offered anywhere and that a mosque is not, by itself, essential for Article 25 protection in every case.
Ratio Decidendi
- Article 25 protects essential and integral religious practices, not every practice or every place.
- Place-based protection applies where the site has particular, integral religious significance.
- Secular steps to prevent communal conflict may validly include acquisition and administration of disputed areas.
Why It Matters
The case shapes the “essential religious practices” test. It guides how courts weigh faith-based claims about places of worship against constitutional limits and secular governance.
Key Takeaways
- Only essential practices get Article 25 protection.
- Namaz is not confined to mosques; place matters only if integral to the faith.
- Acquisition to reduce tension can be a secular, valid step.
Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook
Mnemonic: “ESSENCE OVER ADDRESS”
- ESSENCE: Protect what is integral to the religion.
- NOT EVERY ADDRESS: Place gains protection only if it is integral.
- SECULAR STEPS: The State may act to prevent conflict.
IRAC Outline
Issue: Validity of the Ayodhya Acquisition Act and scope of Article 25.
Rule: Essential practices under Articles 25–26 are protected; location-based worship is protected only when integral.
Application: Namaz is permissible anywhere; acquisition aimed at public order and secular management.
Conclusion: Acquisition upheld; essential-practice test reaffirmed.
Glossary
- Essential Religious Practice
- A practice so integral to a faith that the faith loses meaning without it.
- Secularism (Indian Model)
- Equal respect to all religions, with the State acting to maintain peace and fairness.
- Acquisition
- Government taking control of property under law, with constitutional limits.
FAQs
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now