'Mode Of Access To Temple Not Essential Religious Practice': Kerala High Court Declines Early Opening Of Traditional Forest Route To Sabarimala

The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar observed that the deferment of opening of the Kanana Patha does not infringe upon the petitioner's fundamental right.

Further, it observed that the petitioner's right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution is subject to the restrictions mentioned therein. Since the traditional route passes through an ecologically region, including the Periyar Tiger Reserve, there are several dangers to the lives of the pilgrims and wildlife in the route.

The Court opined:

“We are not persuaded by the petitioner's contention that the deferment of the opening of the 'Kanana Patha' infringes upon his religious freedom. Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, but it is subject to public order, morality, and health. The duty of the State to safeguard lives and preserve the environment constitutes a reasonable restriction under this provision. The avowed desire of the pilgrim is to have darshan of Lord Ayyappa and perform the holy rituals. The mode of reaching the temple can be seen as a means to an end, not the end itself… Under no circumstances, can the mode of access to a temple be construed as an essential religious practice.”

The petitioner had gotten a Virtual Queue/E-Pass for visiting Sabarimala temple on 17.11.2025 and he stated that there has not been any public notification regarding when the traditional route from Erumeli to Sannidhanam would be opened up. He prayed that the route has to be opened up at least 2 days before, to allow him to take the customary forest trek.

The State submitted that the date to open the route was fixed after consulting the District Collectors of Kottayam, Idukki and Pathanamthitta districts through which the route passes and after obtaining the Forest Department. Moreover, since the route, spanning about 35-45 kilometres, passes through dense forests inhabited by tigers, elephants, bears, leopards and boars, regulation is necessary to avoid ecological degradation and human-wildlife conflict.

The Court's attention was also drawn to the stampede that occurred in 2011, which necessitated the introduction of the e-pass for visiting the temple.

The Principle Chief Conservator of the Forest department filed a detailed statement stating that permission to use the traditional route is granted on the first day of the season. It is done with a coordinated consultation among the District Collectors and forest officials, and in strict adherence to the Tiger Conservation Plan.

It was also submitted that the entry through traditional route is strictly regulated, taking into consideration the safety of the pilgrim and protection of wildlife. The operational timings and guidelines are communicated through a mobile app “Ayyan”, the Court was told.

Considering the submissions, the Court noted with concern that presently, no restrictions are imposed on the number of persons who are permitted to travel the traditional route. It also thought of the possibility that the pilgrims may stray from the designated path and engage in activities like cooking, construction of temporary resting places and carry plastic materials on them.

The Court considered the huge environmental degradation that may take place in addition to pilgrim lives being endangered.

It further remarked that the reserve forest is not a transit route but a living ecosystem that the State is bound to conserve. The Bench advised the respondents, including the TDB, the state government and the forest department to determine and notify the maximum number of pilgrims that are permitted to enter the traditional route each day.

Keeping in mind the Precautionary Principle, the Court further advised that there should be mechanisms to publish the carrying capacity for Sabarimala, advisories to restrict time or impose temporary suspension when the crowd density is high and to monitor the number of persons at Sannidhanam in real-time and to record those remaining there beyond the time permitted.

It also advised that a real-time integrated control room be maintained linking the Travancore Devaswom Board, Police, Health Services, Forest Department, and NDRF, to continuously monitor footfall, queue lengths, and medical incidents, and to trigger phased holds. These data can be published so that the public can plan their routes and timings responsibly.

The Court then reminded that protection of the forest and preserving the sanctity of the Periyar Tiger Reserve are part of the spiritual philosophy of Sabarimala.

Since the date of the opening of the traditional route was fixed with deliberations by various departments, including the Police, Health Services, Forest Guards, Fire and Rescue personnel, and the National Disaster Response Force, the Court found it fit not to interfere with the same. It thus dismissed the writ petition.

Case No: WP(C) 41785/2025

Case Title: V. Shyamohan v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 743

Counsel for the petitioner: Mathew A. Kuzhalanadan, Kuriakose Varghese, Sradhaxna Mudrika, Nabeel B.A., Cheriyil Sanil John

Counsel for the respondents: S. Rajmohan – Sr. Government Pleader, G. Biju – SC – TDB

Click to Read/Download Judgment