The Supreme Court today (October 23, 2018) has fixed the date for hearing review petitions filed by Ayyappa devotees against its September 28, 2018, majority judgment
allowing women of all ages entry into the Sabarimala temple, on November 13, 2018.
On October 22, 2013,
Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi had said that the
date would be fixed for a hearingon a mentioning made by the National Ayyappa Devotees Association. Earlier, on October 12, 2018 the court had declined to stay the judgment and also
refused to hear the petitions before the court had closed for Dussehra holidays.
The petitions, including the one filed by Shylaja Vijayan, president of the National Ayyappa Devotees Association, has argued that ‘reform’ does not mean rendering a religious practice out of existence on the basis of a PIL filed by “third parties” who do not believe in the Sabarimala deity. Another petitioner, Nair Service Society, has contended that the court should take judicial notice that an “overwhelmingly large section of women worshippers are supporting the custom of prohibiting entry of females between the age of 10 and 50 years at Sabarimala temple.” The lifting of the prohibition at the instance of third parties, in spite of opposition by a large section of women worshippers, is anomalous, the petition said. A review by Chetna Conscience of Women has argued that a Pandora’s box would be opened if a constitutional court began entertaining petitions which purely pertain to faith, customs, practices and beliefs. A Constitution Bench of the apex court by
4:1 majority had upheld the PIL filed by Indian Young Lawyers Association challenging the prohibition on women aged between 10 and 50 from undertaking the pilgrimage to Sabarimala temple. The Bench found that a restriction on women solely based on her menstrual status was a smear on her individual dignity.
To Do Complete Justice Under Art 142, Not Necessary to Refer to Facts to Decide Pure Questions of Law: SC [READ ORDER]
Judiciary
May 12, 2020
Parth Thummar
(
Editor: Ekta Joshi
)
68 Shares
A nine-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court headed by CJI had reserved its order on the maintainability of the reference of a question of law to a larger bench in a review petition of Sabarimala judgment on February 06, 2020, and for which order pronounced on February 10, 2020. On May 11, 2020, the SC has given a detailed explanation for its order. The Order authored by CJI held that there is no fetter on the exercise of discretion of the Supreme Court in referring questions of law to a...
What Is The Whole Sabarimala Issue Afterall?
Speak Legal
Feb 13, 2020
Lawstreet News Network
23 Shares
“Religion cannot be a cover to deny women the right to worship...To treat women as children of a lesser God is to blink at constitutional morality.”- Justice DY Chandrachud. The religious terminology: The Sabarimala temple is considered to be an abode of Lord Ayyappa, located in the Periyar Tiger Reserve in Pathanamthitta district of Kerala. The place is a heritage site dedicated to one of the largest annual pilgrimages in the world as every year, millions of people...
337 Views
Facebook Comments