Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The 5-Judge Constitution Bench comprising of CJ Dipak Misra and Rohinton Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, Dr DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra JJ., resumed with the fourth day of the proceedings on the ‘Sabarimala Temple’ hearing.

AM Singhvi resumed with his arguments for the day in support of Travancore Devaswom Board.

Rohinton Nariman, J., referred to Devaswom Board’s stand on allowing women for a period of 5 days in a month and stated that “The deity cannot suddenly disappear for five days only to reappear later”.

Singhvi: Do not search for logic here. Truth is people hold a bonafide belief. Women do not enter mosques – forget menstruation, forget age.

He also stated that Can SC decide what is essential? Can you unsettle a core part of a Hindu religious sect? Then a six-month trial is required.

Dr Singhvi: If a person has a belief, it is not for a secular judge to sit in judgment of that belief.

Further, Dr Singhvi argued that “Prohibition is not because of male chauvinism, women accept the ban”.

Chandrachud J., “In a patriarchal society, women are made to go through a certain social conditioning from birth, on how to behave, what to say, what to do, etc.”

CJI Dipak Misra: The question is can a public temple enter into the concept of banning.

Nariman J., The only reason is the paternalistic notion that during 41 days women cannot keep the Vratam, no other temple prohibits women”

AM Singhvi concluding today’s arguments stated that “Such male chauvinism is prevalent in societies and religions all over the world”.

DY Chandrachud J., stated that “We will obliterate them whenever we can”.

Constitution Bench will resume with the hearing tomorrow. [Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, WP (C) No. 373 of 2006, order dated 24-07-2018]

[Source: https://twitter.com/kdrajagopal]