Sabarimala Reference: Supreme Court 9-judge Bench Verdict To Come By October First Week

The Supreme Court on Tuesday indicated that the Sabarimala judgment might be delivered in second half of September or first week of October.

While adjourning a plea relating to the Bodh Gaya Temple Act to October 6, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, who led the nine-judge bench in Sabarimala case, said that the plea would be taken up after the Sabarimala verdict is out.

The counsel before court submitted the larger issues related to the matter may also be answered in the Sabarimala judgment. At this juncture, CJI Surya Kant said, “then we will keep this matter for hearing October first week”.

The Bodh Gaya case seeks to repeal the Bodh Gaya Temple Act of 1949 and replace it with a centralised law that gives the Buddhist community exclusive management and control over the historic Mahabodhi Temple.

In May this year, after 18 days of the Sabarimala issue being taken up by the Supreme Court, a 9-judge bench had concluded hearing in the reference case arising out of the Sabarimala temple entry issue and questions concerning religious freedom.

The Sabarimala review petitions before the Supreme Court of India is presently one of the most important constitutional debates, balancing gender equality with religious freedom. Instead of immediately revising the 2018 verdict, the Supreme Court has chosen to examine wider questions affecting multiple faiths, making the case a landmark in constitutional and religious jurisprudence. Court has now expanded the issue beyond Sabarimala to include Muslim women’s entry into mosques, Parsi women’s religious rights and Dawoodi Bohra excommunication practices along with other similar issues.

After five years of the review petitions being taken up last, the Supreme Court of India in March took up the batch of petitions challenging its September 2018 decision wherein a 5-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court by a 4:1 majority had ruled that the traditional ban on women aged 10–50 years entering the Sabarimala temple was unconstitutional. Notably, more than 50 review petitions have filed by devotees, religious groups, and organisations arguing that the Court interfered with essential religious practices as Lord Ayyappa devotees form a separate religious denomination.

The issue dates back to 2006, when Indian Young Lawyers Association had filed a Writ Petition challenging the validity of Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965 (1965 Rules) and sought a direction to permit female devotees between the ages of 10 to 50 years to enter the Sabarimala temple without any restrictions.

By a majority of 4:1, the Supreme Court allowed the Writ Petition on 28 September 2018 holding that the devotees of Lord Ayyappa did not constitute a separate religious denomination and therefore cannot claim the benefit of Article 26 of the Constitution of India. Supreme Court also concluded that exclusion of women between the ages of 10 to 50 years from entry into the temple is violative of Article 25 of the Constitution of India. Further, Rule 3 (b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965 was declared as violative of Article 25 (1) to the Constitution of India and ultra vires Section 3 of Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Act, 1965.

On 14 November 2019, a five judge Constitution Bench delivered a crucial order by a 3:2 Majority wherein it kept the Review petitions pending without overturning the 2018 judgment and referred larger constitutional questions to a 9-judge bench. The 9-judge bench led by former CJI SA Bobde held that no matter is beyond the jurisdiction of a superior Court of record unless it is expressly shown to be so, under the provisions of the Constitution and held that the review petitions were maintainable.