Emphasising on the importance of religious equality for both the genders, the Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that everyone can use a temple, understating that there are no private temples in India. "What applies to a man, applies to a woman", noted Chief Justice Dipak Misra, who heads a five-judge constitutional bench that is hearing the case related to the ban on entry of women at the famous Sabarimala temple in Kerala. The hearing will continue on Thursday.
The case is being heard by a bench comprising Justices Rohinton Nariman, A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra, apart from the CJI. Justices Chandrachud and Nariman, during Wednesday's hearing, observed that the Dewaswom Board notification excluding women aged between 10 and 50 was prima facie arbitrary. "What is the nexus between age and menstruation? Does notification leave out a 9 year old or a 53 year old who could be menstruating?" asked the judges.
The bench will look if the ban on women entry violates Articles 14, 15 and 17 of the Indian Constitution and amounts to discrimination. It will also determine if the exclusion can be tagged under "essential religious practice" as mentioned under Article 25.
The constitutional bench will also examine the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules and if it permits a "religious denomination" to ban entry of women to a religious place.
Senior lawyers Raju Ramachandran and K. Ramamoorthy were appointed as amicus curiae in the matter.
also read
- 'Can't control elections': Supreme Court reserves order in EVM-VVPAT case
- Here are the 5 questions Supreme Court asked ECI on EVM, VVPAT and control unit
- A day after SC remark, Patanjali comes up with a bigger public apology in newspapers
- SC directive on pleas seeking 100% EVM-VVPAT verification today. What we know so far
Meanwhile, the Kerala government, on Wednesday, reassured its support for the entry of women in Sabarimala.
Earlier, the case was referred to the constitutional bench on October 13, 2017, by a three judges bench of CJI Dipak Misra, Justice R. Banumathi and Justice Ashok Bhushan. In a landmark observation during the course of hearing, the three-judge bench had then asked: “How can menstruation be linked to purity?”
The writ petition regarding entry of women in Sabarimala was filed by Indian Young Lawyers Association. An NGO named 'Happy to Bleed' had intervened and opposed the restriction, while a women-led group 'People for Dharma' had supported the ban.
The Travancore Devaswom Board, which manages the Sabarimala temple, had appealed against the state government and sought to not politicise religious matters according to changing political parties that come to power.
Sabarimala temple, which is open to all irrespective of their religion, shuts its doors to females aged between 10 and 50. The intention is to ban menstruating women from entering the sanctum sanctorum where the deity is believed to be a Naishtika Brahmachari (in a celibate disposition).