Kerala reconsiders Sabarimala stance amid political pressure, constitutional questions arise

Kerala government reevaluates Sabarimala stance balancing religious practices and constitutional questions.

The Kerala government is recalibrating its stance on allowing women of menstruating age to enter the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple, ahead of a Supreme Court hearing. Law Minister P. Rajeeve stated the government aims to strike an optimal balance between essential religious practices and constitutional questions.

This move comes amid political pressure from the Congress and BJP, who accuse the government of betraying devotees. The government aims to address complex legal issues with devotees' interests and temple customs in mind.

Key Facts

Kerala government is recalibrating its stance on Sabarimala women entry.

Law Minister P. Rajeeve stated the government aims to strike an optimal balance.

Move comes amid political pressure from Congress and BJP.

Government aims to address complex legal issues with devotees' interests in mind.

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper II: Polity and Governance - Constitutional provisions, judicial pronouncements, and government policies related to religious freedom and gender equality.

GS Paper I: Social Issues - Examining the intersection of religion, gender, and social justice in the context of Sabarimala.

Potential question types: Statement-based MCQs on constitutional articles, landmark judgments, and government actions; Analytical questions on the balance between religious freedom and gender equality.

In Simple Words

The Kerala government is thinking again about whether women of all ages should be allowed into the Sabarimala temple. They're trying to find a middle ground between what the Constitution says and what devotees believe.

India Angle

In India, religion is a big deal. Temples have traditions that some people want to keep, while others say everyone should be treated equally, no matter their gender.

For Instance

Think of it like a school deciding whether to change its uniform policy. Some parents want to keep the old rules, while others want something more modern and inclusive.

This affects how religious traditions are balanced with modern ideas of equality. It's about what kind of society we want to be.

Finding the balance between faith and fairness is a tough job.

More Information

Background

The Sabarimala Ayyappa temple has been a focal point of social and legal debate in India due to restrictions on women of menstruating age (10-50 years) entering the temple. Traditionally, the temple's customs prohibited women in this age group, citing the deity's celibate nature. This tradition was challenged in the Supreme Court, leading to a landmark judgment. In 2018, the Supreme Court, in the Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala case, lifted the ban on women of all ages entering the Sabarimala temple, declaring the restriction unconstitutional and discriminatory. This ruling sparked widespread protests and resistance from conservative groups who argued that the court's decision infringed upon their religious rights protected under Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of religion. The Kerala government initially attempted to implement the Supreme Court's order, but faced significant challenges and political backlash. The current reconsideration by the Kerala government reflects the ongoing tension between upholding constitutional principles of equality and respecting religious customs and beliefs. The government's stated aim to balance essential religious practices with constitutional questions highlights the complexities involved in adjudicating matters of faith and law. The political pressure from opposition parties further complicates the situation, as they accuse the government of disregarding the sentiments of devotees.

Latest Developments

In recent years, the Sabarimala issue has remained politically sensitive. The Supreme Court has referred the review petitions against its 2018 verdict to a larger bench, indicating the complex legal questions involved. This larger bench is expected to address the interplay between religious freedom and gender equality under the Constitution.

Ahead of the Supreme Court hearing, the Kerala government's current stance indicates a shift towards seeking a balance between constitutional principles and the sentiments of devotees. This recalibration comes amid growing political pressure and accusations from opposition parties. The government aims to present a nuanced view that considers both legal and religious aspects.

The future of the Sabarimala issue hinges on the Supreme Court's decision and the Kerala government's ability to navigate the complex legal and social landscape. Any resolution will likely have significant implications for similar cases involving religious practices and gender equality across India.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding Article 25 of the Indian Constitution: 1. It guarantees the freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion to all citizens. 2. This right is absolute and not subject to any restrictions. 3. The State can make laws regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 and 2 only
B.1 and 3 only
C.2 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: B

Statement 1 is CORRECT: Article 25(1) of the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion to all persons, subject to public order, morality, and health. Statement 2 is INCORRECT: The right under Article 25 is NOT absolute. It is subject to public order, morality, health, and other provisions of Part III of the Constitution. Statement 3 is CORRECT: Article 25(2)(a) allows the State to make laws regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice.

2. In the context of the Sabarimala issue, which of the following best describes the legal challenge involved?

A.Determining the validity of a state law under Article 14.
B.Balancing the fundamental right to equality with the freedom of religion.
C.Interpreting the scope of Directive Principles of State Policy.
D.Resolving a dispute between two states over temple administration.

Show Answer

Answer: B

The Sabarimala issue primarily involves balancing the fundamental right to equality (Article 14) and non-discrimination (Article 15) with the freedom of religion (Article 25 and 26). The Supreme Court had to determine whether the temple's traditional ban on women of menstruating age violated their constitutional rights, while also considering the religious freedom of the temple and its devotees.

3. Which of the following statements is NOT correct regarding the Supreme Court's 2018 verdict on the Sabarimala issue?

A.The verdict lifted the ban on women of all ages from entering the Sabarimala temple.
B.The verdict was based on the principle of gender equality and non-discrimination.
C.The verdict was unanimously supported by all judges on the bench.
D.The verdict sparked widespread protests and legal challenges.

Show Answer

Answer: C

The Supreme Court's 2018 verdict was NOT unanimously supported. Justice Indu Malhotra, the only woman on the five-judge bench, dissented, arguing that courts should not interfere in matters of religious faith and practices. The other statements are correct: the verdict lifted the ban, was based on gender equality, and led to protests and legal challenges.

Source Articles

Sabarimala women’s entry: Kerala Law Minister says govt to seek ‘balance’ between religious practices, constitutional rights ahead of SC hearing - The Hindu

The Hindu·17 Feb 2026