Senior Advocate MR Venkatesh argued before the nine‑judge Constitution Bench that women voluntarily abstaining from temples during menstruation is a matter of belief and discipline, not gender bias.
Key Developments
- Venkatesh highlighted that across South India, women observe a self‑imposed restriction from entering temples and puja rooms during their monthly cycle, describing it as a “non‑written rule”.
- He cited Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's speeches to argue that the Constitution treats temporary defilement differently from the social evil of untouchability.
- Reference was made to Rule 6 of the Travancore‑Cochin Temple Entry Rules, emphasizing that such rules stem from a denomination’s right to manage its own affairs.
- Venkatesh warned that a broad interpretation of Article 25(2) could erode religious autonomy, turning non‑denominational temples into mere public spaces.
- He distinguished between the right of entry under Article 25(2)(b) and the management rights protected by Article 26(b), using the Supreme Court’s own functioning as an analogy.
- He argued that “section of Hindus” in Article 25(2)(b) should be read broadly to include all pilgrims, noting that caste distinctions dissolve during the Sabarimala yatra.
- The concept of