New Delhi, 29 April (H.S.): On the 10th day of Sabarimala temple entry hearings, the Supreme Court questioned how a non-devotee—especially a northern non-believer—can claim entry rights to the Kerala shrine. The nine-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice Suryakant emphasized that temple access rulings must consider whether devotees or outsiders are petitioners.
Senior advocate Indira Jaising, representing two women, argued one petitioner's Scheduled Caste status makes denial a violation of Article 17. All men enter regardless of caste, but women cannot—this defies untouchability abolition, she said. The court clarified: restriction stems from age (10-50 years), not caste.
Jaising highlighted barring women during their most productive, creative years violates Article 25(1) worship rights. You can't tell me to live half a life—skip 10-50, worship before and after. Post-2018 verdict, these women successfully entered; leaders then demanded purification. No others have since.
Justice Nagarathna probed: Who seeks this right—a devotee or non-devotee, and why? A northerner with no temple connection challenging southern traditions demands scrutiny of locus standi.
On April 28, the court ruled religious institutions need structured governance, not chaos. Advocate Nizam Pasha (for Hazrat Khwaja Nizamuddin dargah heir) defended regulated entry as management prerogative.
Justice Amanullah countered: Structure is essential—temples, dargahs follow rituals in sequence, not anarchy.
Bench and 2018 Context
The bench comprises Justices BV Nagarathna, MM Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Arvind Kumar, AJ Meshi, PB Varale, R Mahadevan, and Joymalya Bagchi. The 2018 4-1 verdict struck down age-based exclusion, affirming women aren't inferior and biological differences can't negate worship rights.
---------------
Hindusthan Samachar / Jun Sarkar
