The Supreme Court did not alter its ruling allowing women of all ages to enter the Ayyappa temple at Sabarimala but asked a seven-judge bench to evolve guidelines to decide cases involving a clash between the right to equality and the right of denominations to follow their customs - a tussle that has been brought to the fore by the campaign to let women into temples, mosques and Parsi agiyaris (fire temples).
A five-judge bench of CJI Ranjan Gogoi and Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra, by a 3-2 majority, said the seven-judge bench would evolve a comprehensive judicial policy to guide the court in future adjudication of cases of conflict between citizens’ right to equality and a believer’s faith in religious practices and customs. CJI Gogoi, in a nine-page judgment also written on behalf of Justices Khanwilkar and Malhotra, said reference to a seven-judge bench was needed as the possibility of a collision between fundamental rights - between the right to equality on the one hand and the right of individuals to practise their faith and of denominations to follow their affairs on the other - went beyond the Sabarimala temple entry case.
The conflict has also inspired petitions “regarding entry of Muslim women in dargah/mosque, Parsi women married to a non-Parsi in agiyaris and the practice of female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra community”. The majority judgment said the seven-judge bench would also decide if the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965, mandating the entry of all Hindus into all temples, applied to Sabarimala. It said the bench would “grant fresh opportunity to all interested parties” and consider their arguments. But in their minority opinion, Justices Nariman and Chandrachud responded with a 59-page dissent criticising the CJI for raking up future cases of likely faith versus fundamental rights scenarios.
Evolve a consensus on temple entry: SC
Justices Nariman and Chandrachud said the case in hand related to the entry of women into Sabarimala temple, comprehensively decided on September 28, 2018, and the present five-judge bench should not be concerned about pending petitions. They said the previous judgment must be implemented in letter and spirit and any attempt to thwart - or encouragement to thwart it - “cannot be countenanced”. The two judges told the state to evolve a consensus by holding talks with various stakeholders in the Sabarimala case to ensure the entry of women of all ages into the temple. CJI Gogoi, however, raised a seminal issue - the power of constitutional courts to tread on questions such as those involving a particular custom which, while essential to a religion, happens to be violative of fundamental rights. In 2018, then CJI Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar, Nariman and Chandrachud had all veered to the conclusion that women of all ages be allowed to enter the temple.
Sabarimala temple opens, cops bar women below 50
As the Sabarimala temple opened for the two-month annual festival amid tight security, the Kerala police in defiance of the Supreme Court order, stopped women pilgrims at Pamba, 5km from the hill-top temple of Lord Ayyappa, checked their documents for proof of age and allowed only those above 50 to proceed further. According to police, 10 women pilgrims from Andhra Pradesh “who were below 50” were turned back. Heavy security arrangements are in place at Sabarimala. Around 1,400 police personnel have been deployed at the Sannidhanam (the area near the sanctum), led by a superintendent-rank officer and 10 deputy SPs.
