Sabarimala Case Review: Supreme Court to Revisit Contentious Religious Ruling
Supreme Court re-examines the 2018 Sabarimala verdict, focusing on religious practices.
Background Context
Why It Matters Now
The Sabarimala case review hinges on the essential religious practices doctrine, as the court must determine whether the ban on women of menstruating age is an essential part of the Ayyappan faith. This determination will impact the extent to which the court can intervene.
The court's decision will set a precedent for future cases involving religious freedom and gender equality. It will also influence the balance between individual rights and community practices.
Understanding the essential religious practices doctrine is crucial for analyzing the legal and social implications of the Sabarimala review. The doctrine is at the heart of the debate over religious freedom and the role of the judiciary in adjudicating religious matters.
Key Takeaways
- •The essential religious practices doctrine is used to determine which religious practices are constitutionally protected.
- •The doctrine balances religious freedom with other fundamental rights and public interests.
- •Courts decide whether a practice is 'essential' to a religion, influencing the scope of government intervention.
- •The Sabarimala case review heavily relies on the interpretation and application of this doctrine.
- •The outcome will set precedents for future cases involving religious freedom and gender equality.
- •Critics argue the doctrine allows undue judicial interference in religious matters.
- •Determining what is 'essential' is often subjective and can vary across religions.
Different Perspectives
- •Some argue for a strict interpretation of religious freedom, protecting all practices regardless of their impact on other rights.
- •Others prioritize gender equality and social justice, advocating for intervention in religious practices that discriminate.
- •A third perspective seeks a balance, respecting religious freedom while ensuring fundamental rights are not violated.
- •Legal scholars debate the legitimacy and scope of the essential religious practices doctrine itself.
The Supreme Court is set to review its 2018 Sabarimala ruling, which allowed women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. The review will address petitions challenging the earlier verdict, focusing on the conflict between religious freedom and gender equality. Key issues include the essential religious practices doctrine and whether the court can intervene in matters of faith.
The court will also consider the rights of the Ayyappan devotees and the potential impact on other religious institutions. The outcome of the review could have significant implications for religious freedom and gender equality in India.
Key Facts
The Supreme Court is reviewing its 2018 Sabarimala ruling.
The review petitions challenge the earlier verdict allowing women of all ages into the temple.
The case focuses on the conflict between religious freedom and gender equality.
Key issues include the essential religious practices doctrine and judicial intervention in religious matters.
UPSC Exam Angles
GS Paper II: Polity and Governance - Fundamental Rights, Judicial Review
Connects to syllabus topics on secularism, gender justice, and constitutional interpretation
Potential question types: Statement-based MCQs on constitutional provisions, analytical questions on the role of the judiciary
In Simple Words
The Supreme Court is looking again at the Sabarimala case, which involves whether women of all ages should be allowed in the Sabarimala temple. The main question is how to balance religious freedom with the idea that everyone should be treated equally, regardless of gender.
India Angle
In India, religion is a big part of life, but so is the idea of fairness. This case touches on how much the courts can step in when religious practices seem unfair to some people, especially women.
For Instance
Imagine a neighborhood rule that only men can use the community hall. Some residents might argue it's their tradition, while others would say it's unfair to women. The court is like the final arbitrator deciding if the rule is acceptable.
This case could change how religious practices are viewed in light of equality and fairness, affecting many aspects of social life.
Balancing religion and fairness is a tough job, and this case shows how our courts try to do it.
Visual Insights
Sabarimala Case: A Timeline of Key Events
This timeline highlights the key events leading up to the Supreme Court's review of the Sabarimala case, focusing on the interplay between religious freedom and gender equality.
The Sabarimala case highlights the ongoing tension between religious traditions and constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination.
- 1950Constitution of India comes into effect, guaranteeing religious freedom (Article 25) and gender equality (Articles 14, 15).
- 1954Essential Religious Practices Doctrine articulated in the Shirur Mutt case.
- 2006Initial petitions filed challenging the ban on women's entry into Sabarimala.
- 2018Supreme Court allows women of all ages to enter Sabarimala temple.
- 2019Review petitions filed against the 2018 verdict.
- 2020Supreme Court reserves judgment on the review petitions.
- 2026Supreme Court to revisit the 2018 Sabarimala ruling.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What is the Sabarimala case about, and why is it important for UPSC aspirants?
The Sabarimala case revolves around the Supreme Court's review of its 2018 verdict regarding the entry of women of all ages into the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. It is important for UPSC aspirants because it raises critical questions about the balance between religious freedom and gender equality, essential religious practices, and judicial review, all of which are relevant to the Polity & Governance section of the syllabus.
2. What is the 'essential religious practices' doctrine in the context of the Sabarimala case?
The 'essential religious practices' doctrine is a legal principle used by courts to determine whether a religious practice is essential to a religion. If a practice is deemed essential, it receives constitutional protection. In the Sabarimala case, the court is considering whether the restriction on women's entry is an essential part of the Ayyappan devotees' religious practice.
3. What are the key issues the Supreme Court is examining in the Sabarimala review?
The Supreme Court is examining the conflict between religious freedom and gender equality, the validity of the essential religious practices doctrine, and the extent to which the court can intervene in religious matters. The rights of the Ayyappan devotees and the potential impact on other religious institutions are also being considered.
4. Why is the Sabarimala case in the news recently?
The Sabarimala case is in the news because the Supreme Court is reviewing its 2018 verdict that allowed women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple. This review is in response to petitions challenging the earlier verdict.
5. What was the 2018 Sabarimala ruling by the Supreme Court?
In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that women of all ages should be allowed to enter the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, effectively lifting the ban on women of menstruating age (10-50 years).
6. How could the outcome of the Sabarimala review impact religious freedom and gender equality in India?
The outcome could significantly impact the interpretation and application of religious freedom and gender equality principles. A reversal of the 2018 verdict might reinforce traditional religious practices, while upholding it could further advance gender equality. The decision will likely set a precedent for similar cases involving religious practices and women's rights.
7. What is the historical background of the Sabarimala temple's restrictions on women's entry?
Historically, the Sabarimala temple has restricted the entry of women of menstruating age (10-50 years), citing the deity's celibate nature. This restriction was based on the belief that the presence of women of menstruating age would violate the deity's celibacy.
8. What are some arguments in favor of and against allowing women of all ages into the Sabarimala temple?
Arguments in favor emphasize gender equality and the right to worship, while arguments against cite religious freedom, the essential religious practices doctrine, and the unique traditions associated with the temple and its deity.
9. What are the key facts to remember about the Sabarimala case for the UPSC Prelims exam?
Remember that the Supreme Court is reviewing its 2018 Sabarimala ruling. The review petitions challenge the earlier verdict allowing women of all ages into the temple. The case focuses on the conflict between religious freedom and gender equality. Key issues include the essential religious practices doctrine and judicial intervention in religious matters.
10. What were the reactions to the 2018 Sabarimala verdict and its attempted implementation?
Following the 2018 Supreme Court verdict, there were ongoing debates and protests regarding its implementation. The Kerala government attempted to enforce the verdict, but faced resistance from devotees and various religious organizations.
Practice Questions (MCQs)
1. Consider the following statements regarding the 'essential religious practices' doctrine: 1. It is a principle evolved by the Supreme Court to determine the extent of judicial intervention in religious matters. 2. It grants constitutional protection only to those practices that are considered integral to a religion. 3. The doctrine is explicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: A
Statement 1 is CORRECT: The 'essential religious practices' doctrine was indeed developed by the Supreme Court to assess the extent to which courts can intervene in religious matters. Statement 2 is CORRECT: It protects only those practices deemed essential and integral to a religion. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: The doctrine is NOT explicitly mentioned in the Constitution but is derived from interpretations of Article 25 (freedom of religion).
2. Which of the following Articles of the Indian Constitution are most directly relevant to the Sabarimala case review? 1. Article 14 2. Article 19 3. Article 21 4. Article 25 Select the correct answer using the code given below:
- A.1 and 4 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1, 3 and 4 only
- D.1, 2, 3 and 4
Show Answer
Answer: A
Article 14 (equality before the law) and Article 25 (freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion) are the most directly relevant articles. Article 14 addresses the gender discrimination aspect, while Article 25 deals with religious freedom and the right to practice one's religion. Article 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) are less directly relevant in this specific context.
3. In the context of the Sabarimala case review, what is the primary focus of the Supreme Court's examination?
- A.Determining the financial management of the Sabarimala temple
- B.Resolving the conflict between religious freedom and gender equality
- C.Investigating allegations of corruption against temple authorities
- D.Assessing the environmental impact of pilgrimage to Sabarimala
Show Answer
Answer: B
The Supreme Court's primary focus is on resolving the conflict between religious freedom and gender equality, particularly concerning the entry of women of all ages into the Sabarimala temple. The review addresses petitions challenging the earlier verdict and focuses on the essential religious practices doctrine.
Source Articles
SC to hear review petitions to 2018 Sabarimala judgement in April: A timeline of the case
Sabarimala temple women’s entry: Supreme Court says 9-judge bench to hear matter in April | Legal News - The Indian Express
Why Sabarimala row has landed CPI(M), Vijayan govt in a double bind on poll eve | Political Pulse News - The Indian Express
Sabarimala review petition: Challenge to order that opened temple to all women | Explained News - The Indian Express
Sabarimala majority ruling: Review pending, scope widened | Explained News - The Indian Express