38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, January 12, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Sabarimala Case: Supreme Court Refuses Urgent Hearing Of Review Petitions

By LawStreet News Network      22 January, 2019 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Sabarimala Case: Supreme Court Refuses Urgent Hearing Of Review Petitions

The Supreme Court today i.e., January 22, 2019, declined an urgent hearing of petitions seeking a review of its judgment passed on September 28, 2018, allowing women of menstruating age to enter the Sabarimala temple in Kerala.

The refusal came when advocate Mathews Nedumpara mentioned the matter in the court. Chief Justice of IndiaRanjan Gogoi said that he cannot fix a date for hearing the review petitions as JusticeIndu Malhotra is on medical leave till January 30, 2019.

We cannot fix a date, we have to ascertain from the learned judge (Justice Indu Malhotra) when she will be back and then we will decide a date. She is on leave till January 30, CJI Gogoi said.

The matter was scheduled to be listed for today. However, on January 15, 2019, CJI Gogoi revealed that it was unlikely to come up today, as Justice Malhotra was on medical leave.

The Supreme Court on November 13, 2018, has agreed to hear the forty-nine review petitions filed against its September 28, 2018, judgment allowing women of all ages entry into the Sabarimala temple in open court.

The review petitions were listed before a Bench headed by CJI Gogoi, along with JusticesInduMalhotraRohinton Nariman, A.M. Khanwilkar, and D.Y. Chandrachud.

A Constitution Bench by 4:1 majority struck down Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965, to allow entry of women, irrespective of their age, into the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple in Kerala. The Bench headed by then CJIDipak Misra and comprising of Justices Rohinton Nariman, A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud, and Indu Malhotra held that Rule 3(b) of 1965 Rules which bars entry of women between the ages of 10 and 50 years into the Sabarimala temple is a clear violation of right of Hindu women to practice religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. Following the judgment, violence had erupted in and around the temple to prevent women from entering the shrine.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

wrong-bail-orders-alone-without-evidence-of-corruption-cannot-justify-removal-of-judicial-officer-sc
Trending Judiciary
Wrong Bail Orders Alone, Without Evidence of Corruption, Cannot Justify Removal of Judicial Officer: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that wrong bail orders alone cannot justify removal of a judicial officer without proof of corruption, misconduct, or extraneous considerations.

06 January, 2026 07:43 PM
divorced-muslim-woman-can-seek-maintenance-under-crpc-even-after-receiving-amount-under-muslim-women-protection-act-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Divorced Muslim Woman Can Seek Maintenance Under CrPC Even After Receiving Amount Under Muslim Women Protection Act: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court holds that a divorced Muslim woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even after receiving amounts under the 1986 Act.

06 January, 2026 08:19 PM
delhi-hc-full-bench-settles-bsf-seniority-dispute-rule-of-continuous-regular-appointment-prevails
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Full Bench Settles BSF Seniority Dispute; Rule of ‘Continuous Regular Appointment’ Prevails [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court Full Bench rules BSF seniority is based on date of continuous regular appointment, rejecting claims for antedated seniority due to delayed joining.

06 January, 2026 08:45 PM
borrowers-cannot-invoke-writ-jurisdiction-to-compel-banks-to-extend-one-time-settlement-benefits-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Borrowers Cannot Invoke Writ Jurisdiction to Compel Banks to Extend One-Time Settlement Benefits: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court holds borrowers cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to compel banks to grant One-Time Settlement benefits, as OTS is not a legal right.

07 January, 2026 09:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email