Team  SoOLEGAL

Sabarimala temple verdict: SC allows women of all ages to enter into the temple

Team SoOLEGAL 28 Sep 2018 1:30pm

Sabarimala temple verdict: SC allows women of all ages to enter into the temple

The Supreme Court's constitution bench today lifted the ban on entry of women into the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple in Kerala.

In a majority verdict of 4:1, the SC bench of CJI Dipak Misra and Justices Rohinton Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud, and Indu Malhotra struck down Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965 which was relied for barring entry of women between the ages of 10 and 50 years to the Sabarimala temple.

The Bench delivered four verdicts, including one written by CJI Misra for himself and Justice Khanwilkar, Justices Chandrachud and Nariman wrote a concurring judgment each, while the lone woman judge Indu Malhotra wrote a dissenting opinion.

Below are some of the key highlights of the verdict:

  1. The devotees of Lord Ayyappa do not constitute a religious denomination,” CJI Misra held in his judgment.
  2. CJI Dipak Misra also held that barring women, aged between 10 and 50 years, from entering into temple is not an essential part of the religion.
  3. Women is not lesser or inferior to man. Patriarchy of religion cannot be permitted to trump over faith…Religion is basically a way of life however certain practices create incongruities,” the judgement authored by CJI on behalf of himself and Justice A M Khanwilkar said.
  4. All the devotees have been given the right to worship and there can be no discrimination on the basis of gender.
  5.  “The practice of barring women in the age group of 10-50 to go inside the temple is violative of constitutional principles,” said CJI Misra.
  6. Justice Chandrachud in separate but concurring opinion with the majority, said:

Religion cannot be cover to deny women right to worship. To treat women as children of lesser God is to blink at Constitutional morality.”

  1. Justice Chandrachud further held that “Physiological features cannot be a ground for denial of a right. To suggest that women cannot keep Vratam is to stigmatize them”.
  2. Justice Indu Malhotra, disagreeing with her peers, said “What constitutes essential religious practice is for the religious community to decide, not for the court.” She further held that “Notions of rationality cannot be brought into matters of religion.”

 

Tagged: Entry of Women in Sabarimala   Sabarimala Temple   Kerala   CJI Dipak Misra   Justice DY Chandrachud   Justice Indu Malhotra   Constitution Bench   Supreme Court  
Did you find this write up useful? YES 1 NO 0
Send
Digital Payment Systemview all

Active Members

Have you activated yours ?

New Members view all
×

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

0

DAYS

0

HOURS

0

MINUTES

0

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.