New Delhi: The Government of India on Thursday argued in the Supreme Court of India that the 2018 verdict allowing women of menstruating age to enter the Sabarimala Temple is based on the assumption that men are inherently superior, placing women on a lower pedestal.
The submission was made before a nine-judge Constitution Bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, which is examining broader petitions concerning gender discrimination at religious sites and the scope of religious freedom across faiths.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that certain temples historically restrict men rather than women, citing the Kottankulangara Sree Devi Temple in Kerala where men dress as women during the Chamayavilakku festival, a centuries-old tradition honoring the goddess. “So it is not a question of male-centric or female-centric religious beliefs. In the present case, it happens to be woman-centric,” Mehta stated.
Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj added that public morality should guide such practices, rather than constitutional morality as interpreted in the 2018 ruling.
The legal debate stems from a 2018 five-judge Bench verdict that, by a 4:1 majority, lifted the ban preventing women aged 10 to 50 from entering the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple, declaring the restriction unconstitutional. Subsequently, in 2019, a separate five-judge Bench referred the issue of gender discrimination at religious sites to a larger Bench, framing questions on the limits of religious freedom without relying solely on individual cases.
The ongoing proceedings aim to examine the intersection of faith, tradition, and gender equality, with implications for religious practices across India.
