Supreme Court's 9-Judge Bench to Hear Landmark Sabarimala Review Today

As per the cause list published on the official website of the Supreme Court, the Constitution Bench, also comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna, M.M. Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, A.G. Masih, Prasanna B. Varale, R. Mahadevan, and Joymalya Bagchi, will take up 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.

The proceedings before the nine-judge Bench are scheduled to commence at 10.30 a.m. in the Chief Justice's court and will continue over multiple days in accordance with a pre-fixed schedule laid down by the top court. The apex court is expected not only to revisit the correctness of its 2018 verdict but also to examine broader constitutional questions relating to the scope and ambit of Article 25 of the Constitution, including issues concerning the rights of women to access places of worship across religions.

Apart from the Sabarimala issue, the Constitution Bench will also consider allied questions such as the entry of Muslim women into mosques and dargahs, the rights of Parsi women to access fire temples after interfaith marriages, 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 and clarified that the maintainability of the reference stands conclusively settled, while identifying 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 stressed 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 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.

Meanwhile, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that the Union government supports the review petitions. The Centre, in its submissions, has argued that the issue falls squarely within the domain of religious faith and denominational autonomy and lies beyond the scope of judicial review.

"An inquiry into whether a practice is rational, acceptable to judicial sensibilities or aligned with transformative constitutional doctrines is not constitutional review," the Centre submitted, adding that judges are neither trained nor institutionally equipped to interpret religious texts or adjudicate theological questions.

- IANS