Overview
The Supreme Court on Day 1 of the hearing clarified that it will not re‑examine the Sabarimala verdict in its entirety. The bench will focus solely on specific constitutional questions raised by the petitioners.
Key Developments (Day 1 & Day 2)
- Scope of Review: The Court stated that the matter will be limited to the interpretation of constitutional provisions, not a fresh assessment of the 2018 judgment.
- Justice Nagarathna's remarks: She emphasized that Article 17 cannot be tolerated even for a limited period, saying, “There can't be untouchability for three days a month.”
- Solicitor General's submission: The Solicitor General argued that India is not “patriarchal or gender‑stereotyped as the West understands,” contending that the Sabarimala issue should be viewed within the Indian socio‑legal context.
- Day 2 hearing: Further arguments were presented, reinforcing the focus on constitutional interpretation, though the detailed transcript is pending.
Important Facts
The Sabarimala case revolves around the entry of women of menstruating age (10‑50 years) into the Sabarimala temple. The 2018 verdict upheld the right to equality under Article 14 and the right to freedom of religion under Article 25. The present hearing questions whether the verdict aligns with other constitutional guarantees, notably