“The right of a woman to pray is a constitutional right and does not depend on laws” Supreme Court observed , there is no concept of a temple for private use, once you open a temple, everybody can go, said while hearing arguments pertaining to the entry of women of all ages in Kerala’s famous Sabarimala temple.
“On what basis you deny the entry. It is against the Constitutional mandate” obserevdd Chief Justice Dipak Misra . “Every woman is also the creation of God and why should there be discrimination against them in employment or worship,” said Justice DY Chandrachud, who is part of the five-judge Constitution bench hearing the case .
There exists a traditional ban on the entry of women between 10 and 50 years of age in the Sabarimala temple. Women who are of an age to menstruate are restricted from entering the temple. The Supreme Court on Tuesday began hearing on whether prohibiting the entry of women in Sabarimala on grounds of biological factors was discriminatory and violative of the constitution.
Article 14 guarantees the right to equality, Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, and Article 17 abolishes untouchability and forbids its practice.
The constitution bench comprising of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice Indu Malhotra will address four questions framed by a three judge bench while referring the matter to a five judge constitution bench on October 13, 2017.
The petitioner – the Indian Young Lawyers Association – has challenged the 800-year-old practice of prohibiting the entry of women into the famed Lord Ayyappa Temple. The PIL has sought direction to the Kerala government, the Travancore Devaswom Board, Chief Thanthri (priest) of Sabarimala Temple and the District Magistrate of Pathanamthitta to ensure entry of female devotees between the age group of 10-50.
Appearing for the petitioner, counsel Ravi Prakash Gupta told the court the restrictions on the entry of women in Sabarimala temple is not the essence of their religious affairs as discrimination on the entry of women in the temple is “neither a ritual nor a ceremony associated with Hindu religion”.
The constitution bench will examine whether the exclusion of women based on biological factors amounts to “discrimination” and violates the very core of Articles 14, 15 and 17 and not protected by ‘morality’ as used in Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
The court has heard arguments focusing on whether excluding women (in the age group of 10-50 years) constitutes an “essential religious practice” under Article 25, and “whether a religious institution can assert a claim in that regard under the umbrella of right to manage its own affairs in the matters of religion?”
Besides, the court will address the question whether “Ayyappa Temple has a denominational character” and if it was permissible for religious denomination managed by a statutory board and is funded by the Kerala and Tamil Nadu governments to indulge in practices “violating the constitutional principles/morality”.
Must read More than 100 hate crimes in the first half of 2018in India – Amnesty International
