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

J Nagarathna: the state or court can't say that its not a religious practice, the autonomy is protected. in the guise you say i will do something that will affect the society, the state will go within article 25(2)(b)

Divan: instead of treating rights as fundamentals, its limitations have been treated like that. this is a recipe to gain denominational status, it will lead to survival of the fittest. if that polarisation violates the faternity

J Nagarathna: if there is polarisation, state will step in article 25(2)(b)

Divan: i maintain both are distinct rights- in order for me to be able to enjoy article 25, which is the individual, i need article 26

J Sundresh: denomination is nothing but collective rights of believers. the denomination can't go against the common believers

Divan: we are village folks, we don't have institution-for us to fulfil denomination, we need whole apparatus

Divan: the freedom of conscience is the most personal and private must it still can't be isolated- i may require access to library, institutional apparatus, religious books- in that regard, even for freedom of conscience, my right will be nourished with the institutional rights.

Divan: if all persons are equally entitled to preach and propagate, reading two provisions together- then if you are I belong to different religious facililations-we are both entitled to religious [protection]

Divan: the relationship between the two is symbiotic. article 26 is essentially there to subvert the rights of believers. it is means to an end that individuals under article 25 is fully facilitated.

J Amanullah: what do they believe, I didn't understand? we are entering in dangerous territory because then tribals would say this whole forest is ours

Divan: this is judicially determined-there are water temples in Uttarakhand.

J Nagarathna: there is nothing that you can seek as such

Divan: western interest, builders all are inroad

Divan: each oran is a separated unique one. this is about village folk and its not very organised. they fall within essential religious practice and denomination. i want to emphasis we are entitled to rights under article 25, but even to enjoy article 25 we need article 26.

Potaraju: a non belief will have to be discarded when you are considering my belief

Sr Adv Madhavi Divan: we support rights of worshippers who are known as sacred groves from western Rajasthan of orans. it is as old as the ages. there is a temple but the manifestation of divity is the forest- closed connection with nature. there is absolute non violence and customary abstienence.

Potaraju: in an interpretative process, the court will have to bear the constraints-refers to the Zoroastrian judgment.