Content

• Balancing faith, dignity and constitutional rights
• India’s recent defence surge is not a sign of militarism. It is a sign of maturity

---

Balancing faith, dignity and constitutional rights

---

Why in news?

• The Supreme Court of India is hearing final arguments in review petitions challenging its 2018 judgment in Indian Young Lawyers Association vs State of Kerala, which permitted entry of women of all ages into Sabarimala Temple.
• The matter stands referred to a nine-judge Bench to reconsider the scope of the Essential Religious Practices (ERP) doctrine, denominational autonomy under Articles 25–26, and the proposed anti-exclusion test centred on dignity.

Relevance

GS II – Polity & Constitution

• Fundamental Rights: Articles 14, 15, 17, 21, 25, 26.
• Doctrine of Essential Religious Practices (ERP).
• Judicial review and constitutional morality.
• Scope of denominational autonomy vs individual rights.

GS II – Governance

• Role of Supreme Court in social reform.
• Transformative constitutionalism and institutional legitimacy.
• Centre–State interface in religious endowments regulation.

GS I – Society

• Gender justice and religious practices.
• Intersection of faith, identity and constitutional equality.

Practice Question  

• The Sabarimala review petition raises fundamental questions about the balance between denominational autonomy and individual dignity. Critically analyse in the context of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.(250 Words)

Constitutional scheme of religious freedom

Article 25: Individual autonomy

• Article 25(1) guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practise and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, health and other fundamental rights.
• Article 25(2) explicitly permits social reform and state intervention, indicating that religious freedom is not absolute but embedded within transformative constitutional goals.

Article 26: Denominational rights

• Article 26 protects religious denominations’ rights to manage their own affairs in matters of religion, own property and administer institutions.
• However, these rights remain subject to public order, morality and health, creating inherent tension between collective autonomy and individual equality claims.

The Sabarimala dispute: factual matrix

• A long-standing custom barred women aged 10–50 years from entering Sabarimala, citing the celibate nature of Lord Ayyappa and denominational identity of devotees.
• Petitioners argued the exclusion violated Articles 14 (equality), 15 (non-discrimination), 17 (abolition of untouchability) and 25, asserting that biological attributes cannot justify exclusion in a constitutional democracy.

2018 judgment: core findings (4:1 majority)

• The majority held that Ayyappa devotees did not constitute a separate religious denomination, weakening protection under Article 26.
• Exclusion of women aged 10–50 was declared unconstitutional as it violated women’s Article 25(1) rights and offended principles of constitutional morality and gender equality.
• Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship Rules, 1965 was struck down as ultra vires the parent statute guaranteeing temple access to all classes of Hindus.

Justice Indu Malhotra’s dissent

• The dissent emphasised judicial restraint in theological matters, arguing that courts should not ordinarily interfere in practices claimed as essential religious customs unless they violate explicit constitutional prohibitions.
• It stressed harmonisation of rights, cautioning that generic equality principles cannot automatically override denominational autonomy in matters intrinsically religious.

The Essential Religious Practices (ERP) doctrine

Origin and evolution

• The ERP doctrine originated in Sastri Yagnapurushadji vs Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya (1966) , empowering courts to determine whether a practice is essential to religion before granting constitutional protection.
• ERP effectively allows courts to engage in theological scrutiny, assessing scriptural centrality and doctrinal necessity.

Structural limitations

• Courts lack institutional capacity for theological fact-finding, as constitutional adjudication does not involve extensive oral evidence or doctrinal consensus-building.
• ERP blurs the secular–religious boundary, making courts arbiters of faith rather than interpreters of constitutional values.

The anti-exclusion test

Conceptual shift

• Justice D.Y. Chandrachud proposed an anti-exclusion test, shifting inquiry from doctrinal essentiality to whether a practice systematically excludes individuals in a manner impairing dignity or access to basic goods.
• The test defers to religious autonomy regarding doctrine but subjects outward exclusionary effects to constitutional scrutiny.

Constitutional grounding

• Unlike ERP, anti-exclusion anchors adjudication in Articles 14, 15 and 21, focusing on dignity and equal moral membership rather than scriptural authenticity.

Comparative doctrinal tension

• ERP prioritises denominational autonomy and doctrinal preservation, potentially subordinating individual equality.
• Anti-exclusion prioritises individual dignity and substantive equality, ensuring that religious freedom does not legitimise structural discrimination.
• The core constitutional dilemma lies in reconciling Article 26 group rights with the transformative promise of Articles 14 and 21.

Broader constitutional implications

• The nine-judge Bench’s ruling will influence disputes such as Dawoodi Bohra excommunication practices and Parsi women’s rights after interfaith marriage, shaping India’s religious freedom jurisprudence.
• The decision may redefine Indian secularism from passive non-interference toward transformative constitutionalism, where dignity structures limits on faith-based practices.

Governance and social dimension

• The 2018 verdict triggered widespread protests in Kerala, reflecting deep intersections between religion, identity politics and constitutional authority.
• Judicial intervention in religious domains risks perceptions of cultural overreach, demanding careful articulation of constitutional morality to preserve legitimacy.

Advanced analytical perspective

• The case tests whether Indian secularism embodies principled equidistance or reformist intervention when tradition conflicts with gender justice.
• Placing dignity at the centre reinforces the individual as the primary constitutional unit, limiting collective claims that produce structural exclusion.
• However, excessive judicial activism risks undermining religious pluralism and raising separation-of-powers concerns in a diverse society.

Challenges

• Determining “dignity impairment” under anti-exclusion may still require contextual understanding of religious meaning, indirectly reintroducing theological engagement.
• Reconciling transformative equality with preservation of plural traditions remains an enduring jurisprudential challenge.

Way forward

• Develop a structured proportionality framework balancing religious autonomy, equality and dignity, avoiding ad hoc doctrinal shifts.
• Encourage legislative dialogue and stakeholder consultation to complement judicial reform and enhance social legitimacy.
• Anchor adjudication in constitutional morality, substantive equality and calibrated restraint, preserving both faith autonomy and individual rights.

Prelims pointers

• 2018 Sabarimala verdict delivered by 4:1 majority.
• Women aged 10–50 years were earlier excluded.
• ERP doctrine evolved in 1966.
• Matter referred to a nine-judge Bench for authoritative interpretation.

---

India’s recent defence surge is not a sign of militarism. It is a sign of maturity

---

Why in news?

• The Union Budget 2026–27 allocated approximately ₹6.81 lakh crore (~$81–82 billion) to defence, triggering debate on whether rising expenditure reflects militarism or calibrated strategic correction.
• Commentary by Shashi Tharoor argues that enhanced allocations strengthen credible deterrence, not expansionist intent, especially amid Indo-Pacific instability.

Relevance

GS III – Security

• Defence preparedness and deterrence.
• Two-front challenge (China–Pakistan).
• Maritime security in Indo-Pacific.
• Nuclear doctrine: No First Use.

GS II – Governance & IR

• Civilian supremacy and democratic oversight.
• India’s role in multipolar Indo-Pacific.
• Strategic autonomy and deterrence diplomacy.

Practice Question

• Rising defence allocations in India reflect strategic correction rather than militarism. Examine in the context of India’s security environment and democratic framework.(250 Words)

Conceptual foundation

What is militarism?

• Militarism denotes excessive prioritisation of military instruments in national policy, disproportionate defence-to-GDP spending, coercive posture, and weakening of civilian supremacy over armed forces.
• It is often associated with expansionist ambitions, frequent use of force externally, and securitisation of domestic politics.

What is strategic maturity?

• Strategic maturity implies calibrated force modernisation aligned with threat perception, fiscal sustainability, technological autonomy and geopolitical responsibilities.
• It integrates defence preparedness with diplomacy, economic resilience and multilateral engagement rather than privileging force projection.

Budgetary context: scale and structure

Allocation and capital push

• Defence allocation stands at ~₹6.81 lakh crore, with a substantial rise in capital outlay (~20% increase) to accelerate modernisation of platforms, surveillance systems and indigenous production.
• Nearly 75% of capital procurement earmarked for domestic industry, reinforcing Atmanirbhar Bharat in defence manufacturing.

Comparative perspective

• Defence expenditure remains around ~2% of GDP, lower than the United States (~3.5%) and far below China’s absolute outlay.
• India accounts for roughly 3–4% of global military expenditure (SIPRI estimates), compared to the U.S. (~39%) and China (~13%).

Strategic environment driving the surge

Continental security challenges

• Post-2020 Galwan Valley clash, India accelerated infrastructure, ISR capability and high-altitude logistics preparedness along the LAC.
• Ongoing cross-border tensions with Pakistan require sustained readiness under potential two-front contingency scenarios.

Maritime imperatives

• The People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) fields over 370 battle force ships, expanding presence in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).
• With ~95% of India’s trade by volume and ~85% crude imports moving via sea lanes, maritime capability is linked to economic survival.
• Induction of INS Vikrant strengthens sea-control capability rather than expeditionary militarism.

Deterrence versus militarism

Logic of deterrence

• Deterrence raises the cost of aggression, preventing miscalculation and preserving peace through credible capability rather than active use of force.
• Underinvestment historically produced strategic vulnerabilities, whereas calibrated modernisation stabilises regional balance.

Defensive doctrine

• India follows a No First Use nuclear doctrine and maintains minimum credible deterrence, reinforcing non-expansionist strategic intent.
• India has not pursued territorial expansion or military interventions beyond immediate security concerns.

Institutional and governance reforms

Structural integration

• Creation of Chief of Defence Staff (2019) and movement toward theatre commands enhance jointness, efficiency and integrated planning.
• Defence exports increased from ~₹1,500 crore (2016–17) to over ₹21,000 crore (2023–24), indicating industrial capability growth.

Democratic safeguards

• Firm civilian control over armed forces, parliamentary scrutiny of budgets and absence of coup history distinguish India from militarist states.

Economic and technological dimension

Industrial spillovers

• Defence modernisation stimulates domestic production in aerospace, electronics, AI, drones and advanced materials, strengthening technological self-reliance.
• Defence corridors in Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu aim to build integrated manufacturing ecosystems.

Fiscal prudence concerns

• High revenue expenditure, including pensions, may constrain capital modernisation unless reforms improve efficiency and procurement timelines.

Advanced analytical perspective

Multipolar Indo-Pacific

• In a shifting global order, credible military capability strengthens diplomatic leverage within forums such as Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, BRICS, and G20.
• Strategic maturity balances deterrence with sustained multilateral engagement and economic growth.

Transformative realism

• Defence surge represents correction of historical underinvestment rather than departure from restraint.
• Mature states invest in security proportional to threats while maintaining normative commitment to international law and cooperative security.

Risks and criticisms

Capability gaps

• Fighter squadron strength remains below sanctioned 42 squadrons, currently around 30–32, indicating persistent airpower constraints.
• Procurement delays and bureaucratic bottlenecks may dilute the effectiveness of increased allocations.

Narrative risks

• Over-securitisation of public discourse may blur distinction between national security needs and political rhetoric.

Way forward

Capability-based planning

• Shift from reactive procurement to long-term capability planning, emphasising cyber, space, AI and maritime surveillance.

Institutional deepening

• Expedite theatre command implementation and logistics integration to optimise resource utilisation.

Balanced grand strategy

• Maintain defence spending within sustainable fiscal limits while strengthening indigenous R&D and export competitiveness.

Prelims pointers

• Defence allocation 2026–27: ~₹6.81 lakh crore.
• Defence expenditure: ~2% of GDP.
• India follows No First Use doctrine.
• CDS created in 2019.
• Defence exports crossed ₹21,000 crore (2023–24).