Supreme Court allows entry of women in Kerala’s Sabarimala temple
ABP News Bureau
Updated at:
28 Sep 2018 11:34 AM (IST)
Download ABP Live App and Watch All Latest Videos
View In App
The Supreme Court on Friday pronounced its verdict on the entry of women of menstrual age in Kerala's Sabrimala temple and said law and society are tasked with the task to act as levellers. The five judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra gave a 4:1 verdict.
In four set of judgements, CJI wrote for himself and Justice A M Khanwilkar, while Justice Indu Malhotra gave a separate dissenting verdict.
While reading its judgment, the apex court held that "Women and men are equal as individuals" and that both have equal right to religion . CJI Dipak Misra while pronouncing the judgment said "Banning entry of women to shrine is gender discrimination".
Patriarchal notion cannot be allowed to trump equality in devotion: CJI
Religion is a way of life basically to link life with divinity: CJI
Sabarimala Temple practice violates rights of Hindu women: CJI
Devotees of Lord Ayyappa do not constitute separate denomination: CJI
Kerala law denies rights to women on ground of physiological reasons: CJI.
Sabarimala temple practice violates rights of Hindu women: CJI
Sabarimala temple custom barring women of 10-50 age is not backed by Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution:Justice Nariman
Religion cannot be used as cover to deny rights of worship to women. It is also against human dignity: Justice Chnadrachud
Prohibition on women is due to non-religious reasons and it is a grim shadow of discrimination going on for centuries: Justice Chandrachud.
Popular notion about morality can be offensive to dignity of others: Justice Chandrachud.
Exclusion of women because she menstruates is utterly unconstitutional, says Justice Chandrachud.
Differing in her views from 4 other judges, Justice Indu Malhotra said:
Issues which have deep religious connotation should not be tinkered with to maintain secular atmosphere in the country, says Justice Indu Malhotra
It is not for courts to determine which religious practices are to be struck down except in issues of social evil like 'Sati': Justice Malhotra
In four set of judgements, CJI wrote for himself and Justice A M Khanwilkar, while Justice Indu Malhotra gave a separate dissenting verdict.
While reading its judgment, the apex court held that "Women and men are equal as individuals" and that both have equal right to religion . CJI Dipak Misra while pronouncing the judgment said "Banning entry of women to shrine is gender discrimination".
Patriarchal notion cannot be allowed to trump equality in devotion: CJI
Religion is a way of life basically to link life with divinity: CJI
Sabarimala Temple practice violates rights of Hindu women: CJI
Devotees of Lord Ayyappa do not constitute separate denomination: CJI
Kerala law denies rights to women on ground of physiological reasons: CJI.
Sabarimala temple practice violates rights of Hindu women: CJI
Sabarimala temple custom barring women of 10-50 age is not backed by Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution:Justice Nariman
Religion cannot be used as cover to deny rights of worship to women. It is also against human dignity: Justice Chnadrachud
Prohibition on women is due to non-religious reasons and it is a grim shadow of discrimination going on for centuries: Justice Chandrachud.
Popular notion about morality can be offensive to dignity of others: Justice Chandrachud.
Exclusion of women because she menstruates is utterly unconstitutional, says Justice Chandrachud.
Differing in her views from 4 other judges, Justice Indu Malhotra said:
Issues which have deep religious connotation should not be tinkered with to maintain secular atmosphere in the country, says Justice Indu Malhotra
It is not for courts to determine which religious practices are to be struck down except in issues of social evil like 'Sati': Justice Malhotra