SC questions ban on women's entry in Sabarimala temple, asks if tradition is above Constitution


New Delhi, Apr 11 (Agencies) : Taking a tough stand, the Supreme Court on Monday asked the lawyers representing Sabarimala Temple trust, whether any tradition can override constitutional provisions.

While examining the plea against ban on entry of of menstruating women into Kerala's Sabarimala temple, the apex court asked what right does the temple has to forbid women from worshipping deity at the temple premises.

The SC bench of Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose and Justice NV Ramana observed that the matter should be argued according to the Constitution.

The top court also said that mother is considered to be supreme in India, and 'Mata' has to be greeted first when she enters the room.

The court also asked whether women are allowed to pray in mosques alongside with men, or they are asked to present in a different room.

"Anyone can worship God, he is omnipresent," the top court maintained.

The apex court said that whatever be the judgement, it will be according to the law of the land.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had said that it would balance the right to equality with the right to freedom of religion and to manage religious affairs under the Constitution.

  

Top Stories

Comment on this article

  • Vincent Rodrigues, Frazer Town,B'lore

    Tue, Apr 12 2016

    Supreme Court might have interfered in this matter when this injustice of partiality was in most of the temples.

    DisAgree [3] Agree [1] Reply Report Abuse

  • harish, kadaba

    Tue, Apr 12 2016

    Dear Jodi sir
    Can any women become Pope ?
    Each religion have it's own reason for things like entry or women in some extent. Court should not interfere which is non of its business

    DisAgree [4] Agree [4] Reply Report Abuse

  • ANP, Blu

    Tue, Apr 12 2016

    MR harsh,
    ................, do not comment if you do not know.
    Pope Joan was a woman ...check

    DisAgree [1] Agree [3] Reply Report Abuse

  • Jossey Saldanha, Mumbai

    Mon, Apr 11 2016

    If it was not for SC we would still be in STONE AGE ...

    DisAgree [13] Agree [11] Reply Report Abuse

  • Langoolacharya., Belman/Washington,DC.

    Mon, Apr 11 2016

    Dear Supreme Court judges,

    Gods writ is higher than yours...your writ runs within geographical boundaries of India...till you retire...

    Gods writ runs everywhere...and no retirement for God...God is Omnipotent and Omnipresent...not you...

    Better keep Givine issues between God and his worshiper...we don't need any interpretations...

    ...JH...

    DisAgree [18] Agree [9] Reply Report Abuse

  • Lydia Lobo, Kadri

    Mon, Apr 11 2016

    Langoolacharya,

    I wish you were a bit kinder on the womenfolk who feel deprived of worship for no fault of theirs. We have come a long way and managed to liberate ourselves to quite an extent. Earlier, during the phase of impurity, we were not allowed to reside under the same roof as other family member were living, we were to take shelter elsewhere. Immediate solution happened to be cow-shed. Things have improved, its not that harsh today. I wish you had let the womenfolk opine in the context than responding to the judges who may surely have supported changes in our attitudes from that of stone age as stated in this news.

    The issue is not whether men want women (of reproductive age) inside the shrine, rather that the women are asking to be allowed to worship irrespective of their im/purity phase.

    Allow this lenience to take place and watch out for results than banning women outright. Because, there are several female deities residing in temples devoted for them who certainly may not be vacating the premises during such phase. If that can be true, why this discrimination with humans ? After all, its humans who introduced deities through holy books - no holy book may have glided down on earth all by itself - may it ?

    DisAgree [6] Agree [11] Reply Report Abuse

  • Alwyn, Muscat

    Tue, Apr 12 2016

    Why not the same sympathy for the muslim women folk who are deprived from entering mosques?

    DisAgree [1] Agree [9] Reply Report Abuse

  • Lydia Lobo, Kadri

    Tue, Apr 12 2016

    Alwyn,

    You are wrong. Women do have access to mosques - they have a praying area separated from men. Being in an Islamic country, you should have known this. Well, its not practical in India because mosques are very small, not as palatial as those in Gulf countries.

    Now, do not demand for praying along with their spouse/sons/brothers - its their prerogative. For your information, in some Churches too male/female sit separately. I grew up in a parish of such practice. I never complained about it nor do I have any grudge over such a practice.

    DisAgree [1] Agree [2] Report Abuse

  • A.P., Mlur

    Tue, Apr 12 2016

    100% percent Lydia all this was man made stuff to please themselves in the pretext of appeasing God !
    In above conditions :
    No women was allowed into the sactom
    No women if she delivered for 40 days into church
    No woman allowed into kitchen
    No woman allowed where food ( specially pickle pork ) was cooked..
    Etc

    DisAgree [2] Agree [3] Reply Report Abuse

  • A.p., Mlur

    Tue, Apr 12 2016

    Langoo,
    You mean to say SATI was right...
    SORRY YOU ARE TOTALLY WRONG ,

    A holy book has been withdrawn from schools / state because it goes against the constitution !

    DisAgree [2] Agree [5] Reply Report Abuse

  • HENRY MISQUITH, Bahrain

    Mon, Apr 11 2016

    Nowadays SC is like supreme circus.
    Is everything running here as per constitution??

    DisAgree [9] Agree [11] Reply Report Abuse


Leave a Comment

Title: SC questions ban on women's entry in Sabarimala temple, asks if tradition is above Constitution



You have 2000 characters left.

Disclaimer:

Please write your correct name and email address. Kindly do not post any personal, abusive, defamatory, infringing, obscene, indecent, discriminatory or unlawful or similar comments. Daijiworld.com will not be responsible for any defamatory message posted under this article.

Please note that sending false messages to insult, defame, intimidate, mislead or deceive people or to intentionally cause public disorder is punishable under law. It is obligatory on Daijiworld to provide the IP address and other details of senders of such comments, to the authority concerned upon request.

Hence, sending offensive comments using daijiworld will be purely at your own risk, and in no way will Daijiworld.com be held responsible.