On Friday, the Supreme Court delivered a verdict that many have termed path-breaking.
The five-judge constitution bench, headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, said banning the entry of women into Ayyappa temple at Sabarimala in Kerala is gender discrimination and the practice violates rights of Hindu women, thus paving the way for entry of women of all ages into the temple.
“Women is not lesser or inferior to man. Patriarchy of religion cannot be permitted to trump over faith. Biological or physiological reasons cannot be accepted in freedom for faith. Religion is basically way of life. However certain practices create create incongruities“, the Chief Justice read out portions of the judgment written for himself and Justice A.M. Khanwilkar.
While Justices R.F. Nariman, D.Y. Chandrachud and A.M Khanwilkar concurred with the CJI, the lone woman judge in the bench preferred to differ.
Also Read
- Sabarimala: A tale of flickering light in the woods
- 'No uncontrolled situation', says Kerala CM amid severe criticism over 'crowd mismanagement'
- Why Kerala HC barred production, sale of 'Aravana Prasadam' at Sabarimala
- Sabarimala incidents 'pained me', says Kerala minister; Congress, BJP demand apology
- Kerala govt to withdraw cases registered during Sabarimala, anti-CAA protests
Giving a dissenting verdict, Justice Indu Malhotra opined that issues which have deep religious connotation should not be tinkered with to maintain secular atmosphere in the country.
Defending her stance, she said notions of rationality cannot be brought into matters of religion and India has diverse religious practices, and constitutional morality would allow anyone to profess a religion they believe.
She was of the view that it is not for courts of the country to determine which religious practices are to be struck down, except in issues of social evil like 'Sati'. She said right to equality conflicts with right to worship of devotees of Lord Ayyappa.
Noting that the issue in this case not limited to Sabarimala only, Justice Malhotra said this will have far reaching implications for other places of worships.
Justice Malhotra, who was hailed as the "true heroine in the Sabarimala miscarriage of justice" by some after she came out with a dissenting view, said equality doctrine cannot override fundamental right to worship under Article 25.
She went on to hold that Ayyappas enjoy the status of a separate religious denomination in the country. “If there are clear attributes that there exists a section with identifiable characteristics, they constitute religious denomination”, she observed.
(With PTI inputs)
