Sabarimala Reference : Live Updates From Supreme Court 9-Judge Bench [Day 3]

arguments to be continued.

CJI: what 7 judge has held, the subsequent 5 judge appears to be in conflict may be partly or to a larget extent and we will try to resolve

Vaidyanathan- if a law is to be made, it has to pass the test of public order, morality or health

CJI: it has to pss the muster of article 25(2)(b) also

Vaidyanathan- I am going by Shirur Mutt of seven judges, but mylords want to rewrite that

J Kumar- that is why we are telling you don't pitch it so high

J Nagarathna-keep aside Sabarimala controversy, if you say only persons of Gowda Saraswat only must come to this, or followers kanchimutt only go to kanchi or kanchimutt should not go to shringeri...the greater the people who go here and there...

Vaidyanathan- if its not against public order, moralty or health, whatever is the realistic consequences

J Nagarathna- we are asking in the context of entry nothing else

Vaidyanathan-if they want only for their denomination, they can't seek funds either from the State or private donors or from public because they are not dependent upon [inaudible] from others

J Nagarathna- that will be counterproductive to that denomination

Vaidyanathan-that is for them to decide

J Nagarathna-devaru is per incuriam, to distinguish is one thing but let the religious not be adversely affected.

J Nagarathna: Our apprehension is, keep aside the controversy of Sabarimala, if you say the right of entry, in the context of Venkataramana Devaru, where they said anybody other than Gowda Saraswat Brahmin excluded, it will affect negatively Hinduism. You see, everybody must have access, keep aside the sabarimala controversy, everybody must have access to every temple and mutt. But if you say it is a practice, it is a matter of religion that I will exclude only my section must attend my temple and no one else, that is not good for Hinduism. Keep that in mind

J Kumar: you will be dividing the society