If men can pray and enter temple then why not women, asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday while questioning an age-old tradition adopted by the Travancore Devasom Board denying women entry into the holy shrine dedicated to lord Ayyappa at Sabarimala in Kerala. “Can a religious practice run contrary to the constitutional mandateIJ” asked the SC.
A Constitution Bench of five judges is hearing a petition filed by Indian Young lawyers’ Association and other women rights’ NGOs demanding an end of the practice which discriminates against women, particularly against menstruating women. Girls below nine years and women beyond 50 years are permitted entry.
Dealing with the contentions raised by senior advocate Indira Jaising, who appeared for NGO “Happy to Bleed”, the Bench headed by CJI Dipak Misra said, “When a man can enter, a woman can go too. What applies to a man, applies to a woman also.” The Bench also comprising Justices RF Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra said the right to enter a temple is a constitutional right of all citizens under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
The Bench said the issue on ban on entry may not be dealt with under Article 17 (untouchability) but can be resolved by expanding “all classes and sections” as provided under Article 25, which deals with the freedom to practice religion.
The Kerala Government too echoed the court’s sentiments much to the SC’s surprise. The court noted that in 2017, the State Government had filed an affidavit withdrawing its earlier affidavit granting permission to women to enter Sabarimala. “You are changing with the changing times,” commented the Bench after the Kerala Government said it wished to stick to its previous stand.
The SC appointed senior advocates Raju Ramachandran and K Ramamurthy as Amicus Curiae to assist the court in the matter. The lone opposition to the petition is from the Travancore Devasom Board which maintained that lord Ayyappa is a Naishtika Brahmachari. Also, they claim women cannot bear the hardship and vow of celibacy while undertaking this tedious journey. The SC termed as “absurd” the notification of Devaswom Board. “Exclusion of particular age group of women forces women to disclose their menstruation stage and it violates their privacy,” it said.
Jaising said the action of the Board is an act of discrimination barred by Article 17. The SC said Constitutional supremacy will supersede any religious belief.