Supreme Court Resumes Hearing on Sabarimala and Religious Freedom Reference
The Supreme Court of India is set to resume hearings on significant pleas concerning discrimination against women in religious places, with a specific focus on the Sabarimala temple controversy. A nine-judge constitution bench, presided over by Chief Justice Surya Kant, will address the scope of religious freedom under the Indian Constitution. This hearing follows the landmark September 28, 2018 judgment where a five-judge bench lifted age restrictions on women visitors to Sabarimala by a 4:1 majority. The current bench will examine seven critical questions, including the interplay between individual rights under Article 25 and denominational rights under Article 26, the definition of constitutional morality, and the extent of judicial review in religious practices. The Centre had previously argued that earlier judgments assumed male superiority. The proceedings aim to clarify whether individuals outside a religious denomination can challenge its practices through Public Interest Litigation and define the ambit of freedom of religion versus public order, morality, and health.
Wire timeline
Supreme Court Resumes Hearing on Sabarimala and Religious Freedom Reference
The Supreme Court of India is set to resume hearings on significant pleas concerning discrimination against women in religious places, with a specific focus on the Sabarimala temple controversy. A nine-judge constitution bench, presided over by Chief Justice Surya Kant, will address the scope of religious freedom under the Indian Constitution. This hearing follows the landmark September 28, 2018 judgment where a five-judge bench lifted age restrictions on women visitors to Sabarimala by a 4:1 majority. The current bench will examine seven critical questions, including the interplay between individual rights under Article 25 and denominational rights under Article 26, the definition of constitutional morality, and the extent of judicial review in religious practices. The Centre had previously argued that earlier judgments assumed male superiority. The proceedings aim to clarify whether individuals outside a religious denomination can challenge its practices through Public Interest Litigation and define the ambit of freedom of religion versus public order, morality, and health.
The Indian Express