Supreme Court's 9-Judge Bench Begins Historic Sabarimala Review Hearing

The Supreme Court has convened a nine-judge Constitution Bench to commence hearings on the review of its 2018 Sabarimala judgment that allowed women of all ages into the temple. The bench, led by CJI Surya Kant, will also examine wider constitutional questions on religious freedom affecting Muslim women, Parsi women, and Dawoodi Bohra practices. The Centre, through Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, has expressed support for the review petitions. A strict hearing schedule has been set, with arguments from both sides to conclude by April 22.

Key Points: SC 9-Judge Bench Hears Sabarimala Review, Religious Freedom Cases

  • 9-judge Constitution Bench to review Sabarimala verdict
  • Broader religious freedom issues under Article 25 examined
  • Solicitor General says Centre supports review
  • Hearing schedule set through April 22
2 min read

SC to commence hearing on long-pending Sabarimala review today

Supreme Court begins hearing on Sabarimala review and broader religious freedom issues including mosque entry, Parsi women's rights, and Dawoodi Bohra practices.

"courts should refrain from reinterpreting faith-based practices - Travancore Devaswom Board"

New Delhi, April 7

As hearings begin on Tuesday, the Supreme Court has formally notified the constitution of a nine-judge Constitution Bench to take up the long-pending Sabarimala review matter.

As per the cause list published for Tuesday on the official website of the apex court, the bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant will hear the reference arising out of review petitions filed against its September 2018 judgment permitting entry of women of all ages into the Lord Ayyappa temple at Sabarimala, along with connected issues that raise significant questions on religious freedoms.

The proceedings before the nine-judge bench, which also comprises Justices B.V. Nagarathna, M.M. Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, A.G. Masih, Prasanna B. Varale, R. Mahadevan, and Joymalya Bagchi, are scheduled to begin at 10:30 a.m. in the Chief Justice's court at the Supreme Court.

Apart from the Sabarimala issue, the top court is also expected to examine broader constitutional questions relating to the scope of religious freedom under Article 25, including the entry of Muslim women into mosques and dargahs, the rights of Parsi women to access fire temples after interfaith marriage, the validity of excommunication practices, and the legality of female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra community.

Earlier, the CJI Surya Kant-led bench had fixed a detailed schedule for the hearing and clarified that the maintainability of the reference is conclusively settled. It also identified seven substantial questions of law for adjudication.

As per the schedule, arguments by parties supporting the review petitions will be heard from April 7 to April 9, followed by submissions from those opposing the review between April 14 and April 16.

Rejoinder submissions, if any, will be taken up on April 21, with final arguments by the amicus curiae expected to conclude on April 22.

The top court had directed all parties to file written submissions in advance and emphasised strict adherence to timelines, observing that Constitution Bench matters are of paramount importance.

In the run-up to the hearings, written submissions filed on behalf of the Travancore Devaswom Board have urged the apex court to adopt a "community-centric" understanding of religion, arguing that courts should refrain from reinterpreting faith-based practices and questioning the continued application of the "essential religious practices" doctrine.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the Centre's second-highest law officer, informed the apex court that the Union government supports the review petitions.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

R
Rohit P
Finally, the hearing begins. The 2018 judgment was progressive. Religion cannot be an excuse for discrimination. If young girls and women can be devotees, why can't they enter? The court must uphold constitutional rights over outdated customs.
A
Arjun K
Good that a 9-judge bench is looking at this. It's not just about one temple; the questions on Article 25 affect all communities. A clear, consistent legal framework is needed for religious freedoms in our diverse country.
S
Sarah B
As an observer, I find it fascinating how India's judiciary handles these complex intersections of faith and law. The scope of this hearing is incredibly broad—from Sabarimala to Dawoodi Bohra practices. A landmark moment.
V
Vikram M
The Travancore Devaswom Board's point about a "community-centric" understanding is crucial. The court is not a theological body. Judges are brilliant, but can they truly decide what is essential to a faith? It's a slippery slope.
M
Meera T
Respectfully, I have to disagree with some comments. The Constitution promises equality. If a practice is inherently discriminatory, it must change. Faith evolves. My hope is for a balanced verdict that respects both devotion and dignity. 🤞
K
Karthik V

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50