Sabarimala Reference : Live Updates From Supreme Court Hearing [Day 9]

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.

CJI: we are not going on the dispute, we are on articles 25 and 26

Advocate: article 25(2)(b) is the controlling guidance to article 26. I as a pilgrim, those 3 days, the population which goes is much more than the size of hills and every 10 minutes there is some animals which cries.

CJI: please some this argument on animal sacrifice

Advocate: when there is tantrisism[ocultasim] it violates article 21- there has been a practice of sacrifine-when temple open, there is a animal sacrifine. who are discriminated are the males. if human priest is allowed, then why not the male devotee. like lord ayyappa temple, here there is animal sacrifice.

CJI: who runs it?

Advocate: a trust:

CJI: are you representing a trust?

Advocate: 3: I have given 29 judgments with exception of sabarimala where PIL has been permitted.

Advocate 4[Maa Kamakya Devi temple in Assam]: this is a temple without a denomination, it is a rock in the shape of vagina and this is where menstruation is celebrated. the temple is closed, only women priest is inside the temples and I am on one of the practices of tanthrism, which is widely practised.

Advocate 3: test of hollowing out a religion or viscerating is article 25(2)(b) is vague. suppose if there is a challenging to a legislation, mylords will have to decide what is hollowing out, whether its a religious practice. it is nothing would an ERP test.

mylords should define the broad contours of article 25(2)(b). i have suggested 6 guardrails- expression social welfare and reform is guided by public order, morality and health. 2. powers under article 25 can be used to restrict 3. it can't be used to obliterate rights 4. reform presuppose an existence of a practice. 5. power cant be given effect in pursuance of FR or DPSP. 6. what is protected are bona fide rights and if community doesn't speak in one voice, mylords will have to wear a theological cap 7. locus will have to be of persons whose rights have been violated.