Singhvi: test is yes by subjective belief you can examine whether its part of religion or not

SG Mehta: in Shirur Mutt, the learned AG rejected argument that only essential part would be saved- they were discussing religious v non-religious- not religious v something else- this was negatived by 7 judge but picked up by dargah committee to say only essential

Singhvi: reads what could said in Shirur Mutt: “The contention formulated in such broad terms cannot, we think, be supported. In the first place, what constitutes the essential part of a religion is primarily to be ascertained with reference to the doctrines of that religion itself….

What Article 25(2)(a) contemplates is not regulation by the State of religious practices as such, the freedom of which is guaranteed by the Constitution except when they run counter to public order, health and morality but regulation of activities which are economic, commercial or political in their character though they are associated with religious practices.”

J Nagarathna: what is a secular activity which can be regulated by state to that extent but ERP test my be discarded as per you?

Singhvi: religion or not-court can see but whether essential or not is a problematic path which court can't walk- inquiry is limited by looking from the prism of religious adherent not from objective prism of judge

J Nagarathna: another way of looking at it is anything which does not come within the scope of article 25(2)(a) has to be protected