'Don't Argue Like This' : Supreme Court Rebukes Lawyer In Sabarimala Reference Hearing

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rebuked an advocate for making irrelevant and extraneous submissions in the Sabarimala reference hearing.

The 9-judge bench asked Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay several times to confine his arguments to the issues under consideration.

During his submissions, Upadhyay argued that 'Dharma' is greater than religion, as the latter is a source of conflicts. He contended that "Bharat was divided into 25 pieces in the last 2000 years due to denominational conflicts, and in the last 200 years, Bharat was divided into 7 countries."

Pointing out that "every action has a reaction", he said that the bench will have to weigh the ramifications of its judgment. "Whether in the next 25 years we will become a scientifically integrated country like China, Singapore, or Japan, or become countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan or Bangladesh."

According to him, Articles 25 and 26 are couched in the most restrictive manner and claimed that the right to propagate religion under Article 25 is not recognised even in certain Western constitutions from which the Indian Constitution borrowed aspects.

Upadhyay also stated that Sanskrit has more letters than English and claimed that Dr.Ambedkar had introduced a Bill to make it the official language. He said that there is no proper word in English for "Samvidhan". This was, according to him, because of the limitation of the English language, which has only 26 letters compared to 52 in Sanskrit. "So, when we interpret things in English, it will be very difficult," he added, saying that Dharma also has no accurate English word. He said that he has filed a PIL seeking to introduce Dharma in primary school education.

He added that the tradition of addressing the judges as "Your Lordship" came from the tradition of "Panch Parameshwar".

He then argued that all religions are not equal. Displaying copies of the Ramayan, Vishnu Purana and Bhagavad Gita to the bench, he submitted that none of these texts states that a person who does not follow them will go to hell.

At this juncture, Justice Mahadevan interjected. "You are going beyond the subject being discussed by everyone of us. You said there are 52 alphabets in Sanskrit; similarly, Tamil has 247 letters. Don't go into all those areas. Confine yourself to the point in issue," Justice Mahadevan said.

Upadhyay said that his point was that there were limitations in interpreting the Constitution in English. Justice Nagarathna, saying that Kannada also has 52 alphabets, told him not to go into these issues.

The counsel then continued showing Hindu religious texts to the bench, and repeated the earlier claim.

Justice Amanullah then intervened, "We have to stop you." Justice Nagarathna asked the counsel, "What is your submission?" "My submission is dharma and religion is not the same, and all religions are also not the same," he replied.

"Time is over," CJI Surya Kant then told the lawyer.

Upadhyay then moved to his conclusions. He said that the Sabarimala temple has a distinct sanctity, and the bar on entry for women in the age group of 10 years to 50 years is a reasonable one.

He then stated that while Dharma gives one freedom of thought, religion does not. "Dharma says vasudaivaka Kutumbakam...religion says if you are in my religion...."

"Every religion has its own Dharma," Justice Nagarathna countered. Justice Nagarathna responded that no religion is superior to the other and all are equal and the Court is not going to go into all this. "All religions don't give the Vasudaivaka Kutumbakam concept," he replied.

"Please don't argue like this," Justice Sundresh rebuked him. "It may be a bitter truth," the counsel said. "Absolutely not. You have to understand the scope of the matter," Justice Amanullah told him.

"We have heard you," Justice Sundresh signalled him to wind up.

Today is the ninth day of hearing in the matter. Live updates can be followed here.