The Supreme Court heard arguments on the Sabarimala temple case on Day 2, emphasizing that it will not re‑examine the 2018 verdict but will focus solely on fresh constitutional issues raised by the petitioners.
Key Developments (Day 2)
- The Court ruled that the earlier judgment allowing women of all ages entry to the Sabarimala will stand; only new constitutional questions will be entertained.
- Justice Nagarathna remarked that the protection under Article 17 cannot be limited to “three days a month,” implying that any temporal restriction would defeat the article’s purpose.
- The Solicitor General contended that India should not be labeled as patriarchal or gender‑stereotyped in the way the West perceives these terms, urging the Court to consider the nation’s distinct cultural and legal context.
Important Facts
The petitioners sought a review of the 2018 judgment that struck down the ban on women aged 10‑50 from entering the temple. Their arguments revolve around alleged procedural lapses and the claim that the earlier decision overlooked certain constitutional safeguards, especially concerning the rights of religious denominations.
While the Court will not overturn the substantive outcome, it has opened the floor for discussions on:
- The scope of Fundamental Rights vis‑à‑vis religious freedom.
- The interpretation of Article 25 in the context of temple administration.
- The applicability of Article 17 to gender‑based restrictions.
Exam Relevance
Understanding this case is crucial for GS‑2 (Polity) and GS‑4 (Ethics) papers. It illustrates:
- How the judiciary balances secularism with religious autonomy.
- The evolving interpretation of gender equality under the Constitution.
- The role of judicial review in social reform.
Way Forward
The Court is expected to issue a detailed order after hearing all parties. Aspirants should monitor:
- Any clarification on the limits of Articles 25‑26 concerning gender‑based entry bans.
- Potential guidelines on applying Article 17 beyond caste contexts.
- Future legislative or policy responses from the Union or State governments, especially in Kerala.
For UPSC preparation, candidates should integrate this case study into answers on constitutional law, gender justice, and the interplay between tradition and modernity.