Topic: The Supreme Court's 2026 Docket: Religion, Citizenship, and Liberty

Syllabus Mapping​​

• GS Paper 2: Structure, Organization and Functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary; Mechanisms, Laws, Institutions and Bodies constituted for the protection and betterment of vulnerable sections.

  • Topic: Indian Constitution (Amendments, Significant Provisions), Fundamental Rights (Article 14, 19, 21, 25), Judicial Review, and Representation of People Act.

 

Why in News?

After a year dominated by off-court controversies (impeachments and judge conduct) in 2025, the Supreme Court of India is set to adjudicate on critical constitutional questions in 2026, including the validity of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), the 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill, and the Essential Religious Practices (ERP) test.

 

Key Highlights

• Matters of Religion & The 'Essential Religious Practice' (ERP) Test:

  • Sabarimala Review: A 9-judge Constitution Bench will review the 2018 ruling that allowed women of all ages into the Sabarimala temple. This will re-evaluate the "Essential Religious Practice" test—a doctrine used to protect only those rituals essential to a religion.

  • Hijab Ban: The court will hear challenges to the Karnataka Hijab ban, addressing whether the state can regulate religious attire in educational institutions.

• Citizenship & The State:

  • CAA Challenge: The SC will hear petitions against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (now implemented), which grants citizenship to non-Muslim minorities from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. Petitioners argue it violates Article 14 (Equality) and secularism.

  • Delimitation & Electoral Rolls: The Election Commission’s "Special Intensive Revision" of electoral rolls in Bihar will be scrutinized, as opposition parties allege exclusion of specific communities.

• New Legislation Under Scrutiny:

  • 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2025: A controversial bill proposing the automatic removal of a Prime Minister, Chief Minister, or Minister if they are arrested and detained for 30 consecutive days for a "serious offense" (punishable by 5+ years). This challenges the "presumption of innocence".

  • Online Gaming Act, 2025: The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 bans "online money games" (gambling) while regulating skill-based games. The SC will decide if this blurs the distinction between "game of skill" and "game of chance".

• Civil Liberties & UAPA:

  • Section 15 Interpretation: The SC will define the ambit of "Terrorist Act" under Section 15 of the UAPA. The court will consider if mere "contemplation" or "protest" qualifies as a terrorist act, using the Umar Khalid bail case as a focal point for the "process as punishment" debate.

​​

• ​Critical Analysis

  • Significance of ERP Review:

    • Pros: Refining the ERP test could prevent courts from acting as theological authorities (interpreting scriptures).

    • Cons: If the test is made too rigid, it may erode the autonomy of religious denominations (Article 26) to manage their own affairs.

• The "30-Day Removal" Rule (130th Amendment):

  • Impact: While aimed at "decriminalizing politics," this provision empowers investigative agencies (ED/CBI) to effectively topple elected governments by detaining a CM for just 30 days, bypassing the floor test. This threatens Federalism and Democratic Mandate.

• Retrospective Environmental Clearances:

  • Conflict: The SC recently recalled its own order (Vanashakti judgment) that banned post-facto clearances. This signals a shift where economic "public interest" (saving sunk costs) is prioritized over "precautionary environmental principles".

 

Value Addition (130th Amendment Specifics)

• Specific Provision: The Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025 specifically inserts a clause where a minister acts as "deemed removed" on the 31st day of detention.

• Committee Referral: Unlike many fast-tracked bills, this was referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) due to its far-reaching implications on the "Basic Structure" (democracy and federalism).

 

Mains Question

Question: "The 'Essential Religious Practices' test has forced the judiciary to assume the role of a theological authority." Discuss. How should the Supreme Court balance individual dignity with religious group autonomy in the upcoming Sabarimala review? (250 words)

 

Preliminary Question

Q. With reference to the recently introduced Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, consider the following statements:

1. It mandates the automatic disqualification of a Member of Parliament if convicted of any offense punishable with imprisonment of two years or more.

2. It proposes the removal of a Prime Minister or Chief Minister if they are arrested and detained in custody for 30 consecutive days for a serious offense.

3. The Bill was passed by both Houses of Parliament without being referred to any committee due to the urgency of decriminalizing politics.

 

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(A) 1 only

(B) 2 only

(C) 1 and 3 only

(D) 2 and 3 only

 

Answer: (B)

Explanation:

• Statement 1 is incorrect: Disqualification upon conviction (2+ years) already exists under the Representation of People Act, 1951 (Lily Thomas case). This Bill is about removal during trial/detention, not conviction.

• Statement 2 is correct: The Bill provides for removal if detained for 30 consecutive days for an offense punishable by 5+ years.

• Statement 3 is incorrect: The Bill was referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee.