Read Time: 07 minutes
A 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court is to decide upon the issue of entry of women into the Sabarimala temple in Kerala along with other three matters and thus SG Mehta had earlier requested to tag the matter with the other petitions.
A Constitution bench of the Supreme Court today referred the writ petition filed by the Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community to a nine-judge bench.
"The practise of excommunication has to be considered on the touchstone of morality. We have broadly considered the issues and we therefore request the CJI to tag this matter with the 9-judge bench considering the Sabrimala judgment", ordered a bench consisting of Justices SK Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, AS Oka, Vikram Nath, and JK Maheshwari.
Court further observed that since the 1962 decision in Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin vs. State of Bombay required reconsideration, it would be appropriate to refer the matter to the nine-judge bench.
The petiton argues that the practice of ex-communication/Baraat, prevalent in the Dawoodi Bohra community is violative of Arts. 17, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(c), 19(1)(g), 21 and 25 and is practiced on grounds which have nothing to do with religious apostacy.
The Constitution Bench, in view of the fact that questions relating to the interpretation of Articles 25 and 26 already stood referred to a Constitution Bench of Nine Hon’ble Judges in the case of Kantaru Rajeevaru vs. Indian Young Lawyers Association, decided to refer the issue of ex-communication prevalent in the Dawoodi Bohra community to the said Bench.
The question involved in the petition was 'whether the practice of excommunication in the Dawoodi Bohra community could continue as a protected practice despite the Maharashtra Protection of People from Social Boycott (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2016 coming into force'.
The Dawoodi Bohras are a sect of Shia Muslims, whose supreme leader is empowered to excommunicate or expel recalcitrant members, thereby, denying them access to the community mosque or burial grounds, as well as other facilities.
In October last year, the Supreme Court had reserved its verdict in the petition after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the State, requested the Court either to refer the matter to a 9-judge bench or consider the matter and thereby assist the 9-judge bench.
SG Mehta had further submitted that since the 1962 judgment was decided by a 5-judge bench, therefore it wouldn't be possible for a bench of the same strength to adjudicate upon it.
Notably, a 9-judge bench is to decide upon the issue of entry of women into the Sabarimala temple in Kerala along with other 3 matters and thus the counsel had requested to tag the matter with the other petitions.
The matter dates back to the year 1962, when a bench of the then Chief Justice Bhuvenshwar P. Sinha with Justices AK Sarkar, KC Dasgupta, N Rajagopala Ayyangar, and J.R Mudholkar, in Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin vs. State of Bombay, held that the impugned Act violated Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution and was, therefore, void.
The petitioners were represented Senior Advocate Siddharth Bhatnagar, and Advocate Jatin Mongia, assisted by a team from Karanjawala & Co. Advocates comprising of Ms. Manik Karanjawala, Founding Partner, Ms. Nandini Gore, Senior Partner, Principal Associates Tahira Karanjawala, Niharika Karanjawala and Arjun Sharma, and Associates Karanveer Singh Anand and Mr. Ritwik Mohapatra.
The Head of the Dawoodi Bohra community was represented by Senior Advocates Fali S. Nariman, Darius Khambata, Pravin H. Parekh and Parag Tripathi.
The Union of India was represented by Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General of India.
Case Title: Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community vs. State of Maharashtra
Please Login or Register
