The correct option is It must be justifiable by reason and not excessive.
Explanation
Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution are not absolute but are qualified. The State is empowered to impose "reasonable restrictions" on the exercise of these rights (specifically under Article 19) to balance individual liberty with social control and collective interest.Option Analysis:
- It must be justifiable by reason and not excessive is Correct: A restriction is considered "reasonable" if it is not arbitrary or excessive in nature. The Supreme Court has established that for a restriction to be reasonable, there must be a direct and proximate nexus between the restriction imposed and the object sought to be achieved. It must be justifiable by reason and adhere to the principle of proportionality.
- It must be approved by a religious authority is Incorrect: India is a secular state governed by the Rule of Law. Restrictions are validated by the Constitution and the Judiciary, not by religious authorities.
- It must apply only to the minority population is Incorrect: Reasonable restrictions apply to the exercise of rights by any citizen or person (depending on the specific Article), not exclusively to minority populations.
- It must be temporary in nature is Incorrect: There is no constitutional mandate that a restriction must be temporary. A restriction can remain in force as long as the ground for it (e.g., public order, sovereignty of India) persists.
Key Takeaway:
The test of reasonableness requires that a restriction must not be greater than what is necessary to achieve the specific public interest, ensuring a balance between the freedom guaranteed and the social control permitted.