Sabarimala Reference : Live Updates From Supreme Court 9-Judge Bench [Day 4]

Singhvi: Answers Sr Adv Vaidyanath's arguments on Seshammal judgment on appointment of archakas

Singhvi: consequently even if article 16(5) is applied to Seshammal, it can be harmonised with article 16(5).

J Nagarathna: the appointment is secular but the person appointed ultimately is for religious performance that is not secular. dissect between the two, the entire can't be secular

Singhvi: you have to be from that community and you have to follow the requirement of archakas doing ceremony. that is a religious part. but to further provide that the archakas will alone do the ceremonies must be the next in line irrespective of suitability is where we are striking done [what the judgment says]

J Sundresh: denomination was not there in Seshammal

Singhvi: article 16(5) covers both religion and denomination.

Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi to begin

@DrAMSinghvi

for Travancore Devanswom Board

Singhvi: Five propositions

1. religion is a set of belief followed by group, denomination. while article 25 vests in individual rights, it can't be extended in area which intrudes upon mass of individual rights

2. beliefs and practices are judged by the belief of the community, the court is bond to accept it provided its genuine and its not for the court to sit in judgment

3. it is impossible to add, subtract from the specify constitutional text, and accordingly the additional derogation of essentially as engrafted by some judgments is impermissible

4. permissible restrictions derogation from right to practice and profess were arrived at by meticiously deliberation in constituent assembly. any other dilution of the right by interposition of other judicial restriction would break down the checks and balance

5. rights of persons under article 25 has to read harminously with phrase 'other provisions of this part'