Advocate 2: i restrict to indigenous people-there is more than 700 ethnic groups and they got their own beliefs. they are addressed as advisasis, etc. the constitution identifies them as scheduled tribes.
Advocate: if sabarimala a hindu temple- shankarnaryan stated that sabarimala is not an hindu temple-sabarimala temple is a hindu temple and 95% of the devotees are hindus.
Advocate: it is not fertility but youthfulness which is relevant. [answering arguments that the notion of fertility is relevant]
Advocate: article 25 is the only right conferred to all persons, it will have to be exercised in consonance with the rights of other persons. article 26 is a collective right, it has to ensure that right to practice religion is protected.
article 25(2) of the constitution can;t be construed as conferring any authority to violate and disregard the customs and usages and it doesn't allow derogate the right of the believers.
Advocate Shobha: refers to seervai, a case where hindu dalit was not permitted by jain temple to enter- if writ petitioners are believers, such as the review petitioner, they should not and would not question te neeyam and if they are non believer, they can't as a matter of right
Advocate(for Kerala Brahim federation):mylady had asked what is the nature of sabarimala temple- it happens to be the final hermitage of lord ayyappa. on account of the theological faith that lord ayyappa resides there.
Advocate: the word hindu has come from foreigners people living across indu. Chinese traveller, he says these people are indus.
Advocate: sabarimala, every devotee who desires to have the look of the god, has to go through austerity. it often happens if a man loses his parent or wife, he has to stop the varata. the neevam of the Sabarimala vravat mandates 41 days. if the petitioners are allowed, it would allow to destroying the neevam under article 25(2)(b).
much has been said about sati, reads bengal sati regulation-it categorically says it nowhere enjoyed by hindus are religious duties. even to the hindus it was unlawful and wicked.
Advocate: article 17 of the constitution is there is chapter 5, verse 18 of the Gita.
Advocate: this case says religion has two comparments- basic and circumstantial-earlier constitution bench says its way of life is not correct. what is the basic feature of hindu religion? noone has successfully propounded what is hindu religion.
my submission- this 9 judge bench attempt to make a definition of hindu by taking advantage of Bhagvat Gita. Gita is safe for two reasons-larger commentaries, no conflicting view on Gita. otherwise in vedas and smritis, there are a lot of conflict.
goes on to recite verses of Gita.
Advocate: Unlike other religions in world, the Hindu religion doesnot claim any one prophet; it does no( worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any one dogma;it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not followany one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does not satisfy the traditional features of a religion or creed- this definition is wrong.
Advocate: we are concerned with reference no 6 which says sect of hindu. hindu is not defined in the constitution. in 1966 constitution bench, i will read one paragraph. this was followed by latter bench and in sabarimala, J Chandrachud also relied.