Justice BV Nagarathna, the only female judge among the nine judges comprising the Constitution Bench overseeing the Sabarimala case, expressed concerns on Tuesday regarding the exclusion of women based on menstruation from temples. She highlighted the inconsistency of applying Article 17 selectively, emphasizing that women should not face untouchability for only a few days each month. Her remarks came in response to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s objections to the characterization of women as “untouchables” in the 2018 Sabarimala judgment.
In the 2018 ruling, Justice DY Chandrachud equated the ban on women’s entry due to menstrual impurity with untouchability. Mehta clarified that his defense of Sabarimala focused on age restrictions rather than a specific number of days. He noted that most Lord Ayyappa temples welcome all women, except for a unique case, and pointed out that even Ayyappa temples in Delhi allow entry for all women.
The Supreme Court’s nine-judge bench commenced hearings on constitutional issues referred by a five-judge bench in 2019, stemming from review petitions against the 2018 Sabarimala verdict. The bench clarified that it would not review the Sabarimala judgment itself but would concentrate on broader constitutional matters. Mehta initiated the arguments by discussing the Constituent Assembly Debates related to Articles 25 and 26, disagreeing with the judiciary’s interpretation of ‘essential religious practices.’
The ongoing hearing aims to address constitutional concerns regarding religious freedom and legislative authority. The court’s decisions will provide clarity on the separation of powers concerning religious practices and legal reforms. The Supreme Court’s ruling in this case will influence similar disputes involving religious freedoms and legislative jurisdiction nationally.