UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Wearing hijab not established as ‘essential religious practice’ for women in Islam, says HC

Q1. Consider the following statements regarding the doctrine of essentiality and its later application by Indian courts: 1. The Shirur Mutt ruling of 1954, in which the doctrine originated, arose out of a dispute over the powers of a statutory authority in the administration of a Hindu religious institution, whereas the 2022 Karnataka ruling that applied the doctrine arose out of a State's prescription of a school uniform. 2. In August 2026 the Patna High Court restated the doctrine by holding that constitutional protection extends only to what is essential and integral to a religious practice and not to every mode or manner of its exercise. 3. Unlike the Bench that decided Shirur Mutt, which was a Constitution Bench of five judges, the 2019 Sabarimala reference was made by a Bench of three judges. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. The Shirur Mutt ruling of 1954, in which the doctrine originated, arose out of a dispute over the powers of a statutory authority in the administration of a Hindu religious institution, whereas the 2022 Karnataka ruling that applied the doctrine arose out of a State's prescription of a school uniform.
  2. In August 2026 the Patna High Court restated the doctrine by holding that constitutional protection extends only to what is essential and integral to a religious practice and not to every mode or manner of its exercise.
  3. Unlike the Bench that decided Shirur Mutt, which was a Constitution Bench of five judges, the 2019 Sabarimala reference was made by a Bench of three judges.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2 and 3 only
  • C. 1 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q2. Under the doctrine evolved by the Supreme Court in the Shirur Mutt case (1954) for deciding which religious practices attract the protection of Article 25, what must a claimant establish about the practice?

  • A. That the practice must be so integral to the faith that its removal would alter the religion's fundamental character
  • B. That the practice must be observed by a preponderant majority of the adherents of that faith within India
  • C. That the practice must be expressly sanctioned by a codified personal law that has been recognised by Parliament
  • D. That the practice must be shown to have been in continuous observance since before the Constitution commenced

Q3. In the Supreme Court's October 2022 hijab appeals, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia observed that the High Court had unnecessarily ventured into the question of essential religious practice. What did this observation mean in his reasoning?

  • A. That the wearing of a headscarf was a matter of individual choice covered by Articles 19 and 25, so no enquiry into religious essentiality was called for
  • B. That the essentiality enquiry is available only in disputes between denominations over control of religious institutions and endowments
  • C. That the essentiality enquiry could not be undertaken because the State's order did not expressly refer to the headscarf at all
  • D. That the essentiality enquiry stood suspended until the larger Bench answered the questions referred to it in November 2019

Q4. Consider the following statements comparing the Karnataka High Court's 2022 hijab judgment with the Supreme Court's decision on appeal: 1. Since one of the two judges found the restriction unconstitutional, the Supreme Court's verdict operated to set aside the Karnataka High Court judgment in its entirety across the State. 2. Justice Hemant Gupta upheld the view taken by the Karnataka High Court, while Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia held that there should be no restriction on wearing the hijab in schools and colleges of the State. 3. Because the two judges differed, the matter had to be placed before the Chief Justice of India for assignment to a larger Bench. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. Since one of the two judges found the restriction unconstitutional, the Supreme Court's verdict operated to set aside the Karnataka High Court judgment in its entirety across the State.
  2. Justice Hemant Gupta upheld the view taken by the Karnataka High Court, while Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia held that there should be no restriction on wearing the hijab in schools and colleges of the State.
  3. Because the two judges differed, the matter had to be placed before the Chief Justice of India for assignment to a larger Bench.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2 and 3 only
  • C. 1 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q5. The Class 11 student's petition dismissed by the Allahabad High Court in August 2026, seeking to wear a headscarf along with her school uniform, was founded principally on which pair of constitutional provisions?

  • A. Articles 14 and 19(1)(a)
  • B. Articles 21A and 29(2)
  • C. Articles 26 and 30(1)
  • D. Articles 15(1) and 25(2)(b)

Q6. While dismissing the plea, the Allahabad High Court held that the institution's toleration of the headscarf from Class 6 onwards had not created an enforceable vested right. What is the effect of that holding?

  • A. Past non-enforcement of a uniform rule does not disable the institution from insisting on compliance with it later
  • B. A right enjoyed without objection matures into an easement enforceable against the institution after twelve years of use
  • C. The institution was barred from altering its uniform requirement mid-session but was free to revise it from the next academic year
  • D. The student's remedy lay in a civil suit for breach of the admission contract rather than in a writ petition before the Court

Q7. Clause (2) of Article 25 preserves the power to make laws regulating secular activity associated with religious practice and providing for social welfare and reform. By the text of that clause, in whom is this power vested?

  • A. In the State, whose existing laws on these subjects are in any case expressly saved
  • B. In Parliament alone, acting under its residuary power of legislation in the Union List
  • C. In the State Legislatures alone, religious endowments being an entry in the State List
  • D. In the President, acting on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers of the Union

Q8. Which one of the following is the Union Department that administers the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Samagra Shiksha scheme through which free uniforms and textbooks are provided?

  • A. Department of Elementary Education and Literacy, Ministry of Human Resource Development
  • B. Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Education
  • C. Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education
  • D. Department of Secondary and Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development

Q9. In the Union Budget 2026-27, which one of the following schemes has the largest allocation under the Department of School Education and Literacy?

  • A. PM POSHAN
  • B. Samagra Shiksha
  • C. PM SHRI
  • D. Strengthening Teaching-Learning and Results for States (STARS)

Q10. As of 2026, the questions arising out of the 2019 Sabarimala reference concerning the limits of judicial scrutiny of religious practices are being heard by which one of the following?

  • A. A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court headed by the Chief Justice of India
  • B. A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court presided over by the senior-most puisne judge
  • C. A seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court, that being the invariable strength for revisiting an earlier ruling
  • D. A Full Bench of the Kerala High Court, which alone can decide disputes concerning temples situated in Kerala

Q11. Consider the following statements about the Benches of the higher judiciary in India: 1. A decision of one High Court is binding on all other High Courts, while a decision rendered by a two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court binds only the parties before it. 2. A Division Bench of a High Court consists of two judges, whereas the minimum number of judges required to decide a case involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution is five. 3. The Karnataka hijab matter was decided by a Full Bench of three judges of that High Court, whereas the appeals against that decision were heard in the Supreme Court by a Bench of two judges. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. A decision of one High Court is binding on all other High Courts, while a decision rendered by a two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court binds only the parties before it.
  2. A Division Bench of a High Court consists of two judges, whereas the minimum number of judges required to decide a case involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution is five.
  3. The Karnataka hijab matter was decided by a Full Bench of three judges of that High Court, whereas the appeals against that decision were heard in the Supreme Court by a Bench of two judges.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2 only
  • C. 2 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3