Sabarimala Reference : Live Updates From Supreme Court 9-Judge Bench [Day 12]

Advocate: mylords have held once there is a special statute, common law can't trump. it is meant to preserve ethnicity and race.

Advocate: Zoorastraians and parsis are used interchangeably. for the judgment to hold that she was married under special marriage act, she ceases to be both zoorastrian and parsis and it follows the common law doctrine.

Advocate: I will to add one additional factor to Khambata's arguments. the word parsi comes from parts in modern day Iran. they are descendants of the Persians. today your race and ethnicity by birth and how can that be taken away from you because of marriage to say you cease to be a Parsi?

Khambata concludes. my lords are called to interpret a constitution which will impact over a million. please keep in mind constitutional silence is not the same as constitutional gap, starting with collegium system.

Sr Adv Karl Tamboly to begin.

Khambata: reads one european court of justice case read: issue was slaughtering of animals by stunning them before slaugther- issue was whether stunning was necessary- court balanced the rights and said if its not essential or key part of the religion, there can be a prohibition.

J Nagarathna: so whatever defence is available against state can also be claimed against individual?

Khambata: what is an inessential practice can't trump the right to freely practice and propage the religion

Khambata: it is essentially against state action and right of exclusion will have to be established based on religious doctrines. what is the precise interest of article 25(1)-time tested integral, essential would be good fundamentals to balance the rights.

Khambata: article 26(b) is right of autonomy from state action but its not a right of domination.

J Sundresh: whether this can be introduced in article 25(1). concedingly article 25 is introduced for the group and you question it, they would be entitled but if you question is, would you be entitled?