A male prerogative: Sabarimala temple.

SC deflects Sabarimala to larger bench; clubs it with women’s rights under other religions

Issue is can courts interfere in such integral parts of religion: SC; partial win: Temple Board

Agency Report | New Delhi/Thiruvananthapuram | 14 November, 2019 | 11:00 PM

The Supreme Court has said that the issue of Muslim women’s entry to mosques, cases of female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra community and access to fire temples or ‘towers of silence’ for Parsi women who marry outside the community will all be clubbed along with the Sabarimala matter. The Supreme Court said a seven-judge bench will be convened to examine the issues of women’s entry into any house of worship and other religious practices that discriminate against women after it was asked to review a September 2018 order that allowed women entry into Kerala’s revered Sabarimala temple. The five-judge bench led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi split 3:2 on the issue of entry of women into Kerala’s Sabarimala temple, was unanimous in its decision that the various other religious issues should be referred to the seven-judge bench.

“Restrictions on women in religious places are not restricted to Sabarimala alone and are prevalent in other religions also,” the Chief Justice said as he read out the majority verdict on the review petitions, adding that the court should evolve a common policy on religious places like Sabarimala.

The majority of CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra expressed that the issue of whether a court can interfere in essential practices of a religion needed to be examined by a larger bench. “There is a seminal issue as to the power of the court to determine if the constitutional court can interfere in such integral parts of the religion,” the top court said.

Justice AM Khanwilkar, who had sided with the majority verdict in 2018 — allowing all women entry into the Sabarimala shrine — has in this ruling called for a review of last year’s verdict.
However, the majority verdict did not say anything adverse against the apex court’s September 28, 2018 decision allowing women to enter the shrine nor did it stay the earlier judgement.

The minority verdict by Justices R F Nariman and D Y Chandrachud gave a dissenting view by dismissing all the review pleas and directing compliance of its September 28, 2018, decision.

The split decision came on as many as 65 petitions – including 56 review petitions and four fresh writ petitions and five transfer pleas – which were filed after the apex court verdict of September last year sparked violent protests in Kerala.

The apex court, by a majority verdict of 4:1, on September 28, 2018, had lifted the ban that prevented women and girls between the age of 10 and 50 from entering the famous Ayyappa shrine in Kerala and held that the centuries-old Hindu religious practice was illegal and unconstitutional.

The Travancore Devaswom Board counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi said that the decision of the five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court to refer the issue of women’s entry into Sabarimala temple to a larger 7-judge bench for re-examination as a “partial victory”.

Speaking to the media in the Supreme Court complex, Singhvi said: “The court has referred the matter to a larger bench which is a partial success.”

He said that he appeared for the Board and “our contention was that the faith and feeling in religious terms, which is protected constitutionally under Article 25 and 26 unless very derogable constitutional limits to the extent that issue has been referred to a larger bench connected with several other matters”.

“I think there is a partial recognition that the original Sabrimala judgement may need reconsideration,” he said, adding that it is a partial victory for the Board.

Singhvi further said that although “dissenting judges Justice R.F. Nariman and D.Y. Chandrachud have differed with the arguments that I made, I find reading the judgement today ringing profound, very beautifully crafted and clear poetical pros. I think it is the victory of law. I hope a new bench is constituted in the near future. And a final decision binding on all is delivered,” he added.

The senior lawyer’s remarks came after the Supreme Court did not stay its earlier judgement lifting the ban on the entry of women aged between 10 and 50 years into the Sabarimala temple in Kerala and referred the review petitions on it to a seven-member bench for further consideration.

A five-judge bench, in a 3:2 decision, clubbed the matter with the entry of Muslim women to mosques and of Parsi women in the Tower of Silence.

Reacting to the Supreme Court’s verdict, Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan said the government is attempting to get more clarity on the verdict.

“Our government is fully committed to abide by whatever the verdict is and there are no questions about it. At the moment there is some ambiguity over the verdict and for more clarity, we will seek legal help,” Vijayan said while speaking to the media, here.

“Once this verdict undergoes legal scrutiny, it will be more clear and for that, we will do the needful. Today’s verdict has not stayed the September 28th verdict. Had one more person in the bench opposed it, then things would have been different,” noted Vijayan.

The Chief Minister, however, was non-committal on questions about how the state government would react if women made a renewed attempt to enter the temple.

“Such things we will see, at the appropriate time,” he said, adding that there is no stay on the September 28, 2018, judgement, which lifted the ban on the entry of women aged between 10 and 50.

According to this verdict, women of all ages can visit the shrine till a larger bench decides the issue, which is actually no relief to the petitioners who had moved the top court seeking a review of its earlier judgement.

Meanwhile, BJP spokesperson Sobha Surendran has cautioned Vijayan and said the party will strongly oppose any breaching of Sabarimala temple traditions.

Last visiting season, while several women, including lady journalists, were chased away while trying to enter Sabarimala by right-wing activists, the Kerala Police provided complete security to two women on January 2nd this year and allowed them to pray at the temple.

Women rights activist Trupti Desai welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision. “I welcome the decision given by the court today. I feel that the festival is just around the corner so the judicature must have felt that any new decision may instigate violence. But I also believe the court must make the decision in the matter at the earliest so that the women can offer prayers at the shrine during the festive season,” Desai said.

Desai had made an unsuccessful attempt to enter the temple in November last year, weeks after the Supreme Court lifted the ban that stopped women and girls between the age of 10 and 50 from entering the famous Ayyappa shrine in Kerala.

“What I understand is that till the court order comes, entry is open for women and no one should protest against it. People who say that there is no discrimination at all are wrong because women of specific ages are not allowed there. I am going to offer prayers on November 16,” the Pune activist said. (IANS)