Supreme Court Sabarimala Hearing:The Supreme Court hearings about the Sabarimala Temple lead to renewed national discussions about gender-based entry restrictions for religious spaces.
The 2018 judgment which allowed women of all ages to enter the temple has now developed into a constitutional matter of higher importance.
Supreme Court Sabarimala Hearing
The Constitution bench of nine judges will assess whether judges possess the authority to control religious traditions and to what degree these traditions must comply with essential rights which include equality and dignity and freedom from discrimination.
The Central Government presented its arguments during the recent hearings to show that the Sabarimala matter requires assessment as an interconnected issue. It submitted that several temples across India follow traditions where men, not women, are subject to restrictions, either permanently or during specific rituals.
The Centre used these examples to show that religious spaces impose gender-based restrictions because of established customs and mythological beliefs.
The Centre explained that constitutional protections safeguard both individual rights and the rights of religious denominations which Article 26 of the Constitution allows them to govern their internal religious matters.
Nalanda Temple Stampede: 8 Killed, Several Injured at Sheetla Temple Amid Heavy Crowd in Bihar
Temples Where Men Face Restrictions
The Kamakhya Temple serves as a major Shakti Peetha temple which researchers used as a central temple reference point for their study. The temple shuts down for several days during the annual Ambubachi festival because devotees believe the goddess experiences her menstrual cycle.
The Brahma Temple represents one of the few existing temples which dedicate their worship to Lord Brahma. The temple follows traditional customs which restrict married men from accessing the sacred area during particular times which occur at special ceremonial events. The practice connects to Brahma and Savitri’s mythological stories which involve their relationship.
Kanyakumari Temple in Tamil Nadu dedicates its worship to goddess Kanyakumari who represents an incarnation of Goddess Parvati.
Santoshi Mata Mandir in Jodhpur Rajasthan prohibits men from entering on Fridays because the day belongs to the deity and according to legends the temple’s power reaches its peak during this time.
The temple in Muzaffarpur Bihar imposes a temporary restriction which prevents men from entering the premises.
Temple in Kerala through its Chamayavilakku tradition shows its special cultural heritage. The temple permits entry to all visitors except for men who must wear women’s clothing to receive the goddess’s blessings.
Attukal Bhagavathy Temple in Thiruvananthapuram serves as a second shrine dedicated to Bhagavathi which attracts visitors during the Attukal Pongala festival.
Supreme Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court, while hearing the matter, raised critical questions about the balance between religious freedom and fundamental rights. The bench observed that it has the authority to examine whether a religious practice violates constitutional principles.
“It is submitted that considering its unique and distinct features in Hinduism, its rituals, beliefs, mode of worship, and other religious rights under Article 25 and 26 can never be tested directly, without any balancing and optimisation, on the touchstone of Article 14,” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre said.
The Court examined whether people who do not practice a specific religion should possess the authority to dispute the internal practices of that religion.
The first aspect of the conflict involves Article 14 equality protection, which forbids discrimination based on multiple factors, including gender. The second element of the conflict belongs to Articles 25 and 26, which grant religious groups the authority to maintain their religious practices and traditions.
