Sabarimala Reference : Supreme Court Constitutes 9-Judge Bench; Hearing To Commence On April 7
The Supreme Court will commence hearing the Sabarimala reference matter from April 7 before a nine-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant.
Apart from the CJI, the Bench comprises Justice BV Nagarathna, Justice MM Sundresh, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Justice Aravind Kumar, Justice Augustine George Masih, Justice Prasanna B Varale, Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Joymalya Bagchi.
The reference pertains to broader constitutional questions arising from the Court's 2018 judgment in the Sabarimala temple entry case, including the interplay between the right to freedom of religion and other fundamental rights such as equality and dignity, as well as the scope of judicial review in matters involving essential religious practices.
The nine-judge Bench is considering broader issues that extend beyond the Sabarimala dispute and have implications for similar controversies involving religious practices across faiths. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board and certain Jain organisations have also intervened in the matter, giving their written submissions.
Background
In September 2018, the Supreme Court by a 4:1 majority permitted entry of women of all age groups to the Sabarimala temple, holding that 'devotion cannot be subjected to gender discrimination'. Then CJI Dipak Misra, Justices RF Nariman, AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud constituted the majority, while lone woman judge on the bench, Justice Indu Malhotra, dissented.
The judgment of the CJI held that Lord Ayyappa devotees will not constitute a separate religious denomination. Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship(Authorization of Entry) Rules 1965, which prohibited entry of women in Sabarimala, was also struck down as unconstitutional. Assailing this decision, a bunch of review petitions and writ petitions later came to be filed.
On November 14, 2019, a 5-judge bench headed by then CJI Ranjan Gogoi observed by a 3:2 majority that certain issues in the Sabarimala review were common to the pending cases concerning women entry in Mosques, validity of the practice of Female Genital Mutilation among Dawoodi Bohra community and the right of Parsi women who had married outside community to enter Fire Temples.
In January, 2020, the Court notified the constitution of a 9-judge bench to consider the larger issues. It comprised then CJI SA Bobde, Justices R Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan, L Nageshwara Rao, Mohan M Shantanagoudar, S Abdul Nazeer, R Subhash Reddy, BR Gavai and Surya Kant (now CJI). In February, the 9-judge bench held that the reference was maintainable and questions of law could be referred to a larger bench in review. It framed 7 issues for consideration:
1. What is the scope and ambit of right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India?
2. What is the inter-play between the rights of persons under Article 25 of the Constitution of India and rights of religious denomination under Article 26 of the Constitution of India?
3. Whether the rights of a religious denomination under Article 26 of the Constitution of India are subject to other provisions of Part III of the Constitution of India apart from public order, morality and health?
4. What is the scope and extent of the word 'morality' under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India and whether it is meant to include Constitutional morality?
5. What is the scope and extent of judicial review with regard to a religious practice as referred to in Article 25 of the Constitution of India?
6. What is the meaning of expression "Sections of Hindus" occurring in Article 25 (2) (b) of the Constitution of India?
7. Whether a person not belonging to a religious denomination or religious group can question a practice of that religious denomination or religious group by filing a PIL?
In February, 2023, a Constitution Bench referred the question of the validity of the practice of excommunication prevalent among the Dawoodi Bohras to the nine-Judge Bench constituted to review the 2018 Sabarimala judgement.
Case Title: KANTARU RAJEEVARU Versus INDIAN YOUNG LAWYERS ASSOCIATION THR.ITS GENERAL SECRETARY MS. BHAKTI PASRIJA AND ORS., R.P.(C) No. 3358/2018 in W.P.(C) No. 373/2006