94‑Year‑Old Scholar S. Parameswaran Nampoothiri Seeks Supreme Court Intervention in Sabarimala Entry Dispute

Overview: A 94‑year‑old scholar from Kerala, S. Parameswaran Nampoothiri , has filed a fresh intervention petition before the Supreme Court . The petition seeks to influence the pending reference on the Sabarimala temple entry case, arguing that customs that contravene constitutional guarantees must be struck down. Key Developments Parameswaran Nampoothiri, a freedom‑fighter, traveller and author of over 15 books, filed the intervention on the grounds that neither Article 25 nor Article 26 of the Constitution justify barring women of any age from Sabarimala. The petitioner contends that discrimination based on menstruation violates the dignity clause of Article 21 and undermines the Constitution’s basic structure of gender equality. He reiterates that customs, however ancient, cannot override constitutional guarantees; the Constitution remains supreme for all citizens. The intervention is the third such filing by Nampoothiri (previously in 2016 and 2017), the earlier one demanding a bench with at least 50% women judges. A 9‑judge bench is currently hearing the reference, which stems from the 2018 Constitution Bench judgment that, by a 4:1 majority, allowed women of all ages to enter the temple. Important Facts • Age and credentials: Nampoothiri is 94, belongs to the Kerala Namboothiri Brahmin community, and has studied Sanskrit and Ayurveda traditionally. • Literary contribution: Author of “ Maha Kshetrangaliloode ” (Through Great Temples), which includes a chapter on Sabarimala. • Legal representation: Petition drafted by Adv. Shivangi Ranjan and filed through Adv. Wills Mathews. • Constitutional principle invoked: The petitioner cites the Basic Structure Doctrine and stresses that gender equality is part of this core. UPSC Relevance The case illustrates the interplay of constitutional morality over religious customs, a recurring theme in GS‑2 (Polity). It underscores the role of the judiciary in safeguarding gender equality . Understanding Articles 25, 26 and 21, and the basic structure doctrine, is essential for answering questions on fundamental rights, secularism, and judicial review. Way Forward • The petition may prompt the Court to examine whether the existing 9‑judge bench should be reconstituted with greater gender representation. • A ruling reinforcing that customs cannot supersede constitutional guarantees would strengthen the doctrine of constitutional morality and could influence other religious‑custom disputes. • For policymakers, the case highlights the need to balance respect for cultural traditions with the imperative of upholding fundamental rights, especially for women.