SC throws Sabarimala test open to more faiths

3-2 VERDICT 7-member bench to hear rights vs religious freedom issue; 2 justices disagree

NEW DELHI/THIRUVANANTHAPURAM:

The Supreme Court on Thursday referred pleas seeking a review of its September 28, 2018 order allowing the entry of women of all ages into the ancient Sabarimala temple to a larger seven-judge bench, saying in a majority 3-2 verdict that gender-based restrictions on the entry of women were not limited to the hilltop shrine in Kerala, but were also prevalent in places of worship belonging to other religions.

The larger bench will re-examine the Sabarimala issue as well as those related to the entry of women into mosques, and the denial of access to fire temples for Parsi women who marry outside the community. It will also rule on the practice of female genital mutilation among Dawoodi Bohras, ruled the Court in a verdict delivered days before the shrine reopens for a three-month pilgrimage and Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi retires.

Political parties welcomed and women’s activists questioned the decision, which came on 65 petitions -- 56 review petitions, four fresh writ petitions, and five transfer pleas -- filed after the apex court verdict last year sparked violent protests in Kerala. The Kerala government said it will consult legal experts on the ruling. The five-judge Constitution bench headed by CJI Gogoi stopped short of staying the September

2018 judgment, meaning that women of all ages, including female devotees in the childbearing age group of 10-50 years, can still offer prayers at the temple.

“The decision of a larger bench would put at rest recurring issues touching the upon the rights flowing from Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India,” which deal with religious matters, read the majority judgment by CJI Gogoi, who wrote it, and justices AM Khanwilkar and Indu Malhtora.

“It is essential to adhere to judicial discipline and propriety when more than one petition is pending on the same, similar or overlapping issues in the same court for which all cases must proceed together,” read the judgment.

Justice RF Nariman, writing a dissenting judgment by himself and justice DY Chandrachud, regretted his “inability to agree with” the view of the CJI and said the scope of the review pleas was limited to the entry of menstruating women into the hilltop shrine.