SC to only hear questions referred in Nov 14 review order on Sabarimala temple case

Image
ANI General News
Last Updated : Jan 13 2020 | 11:55 AM IST

A nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Monday said that it will only hear the questions referred in the review order passed by it in November last year in the Sabarimala temple case, which allowed women and girls of all age groups to visit the shrine in Kerala.

The new bench constituted in the matter is headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde. The other judges on the bench are Justices R Banumathi, L Nageswara Rao, Ashok Bhushan, Mohan M Shantanagoudar, S Abdul Nazeer, R Subhash Reddy, BR Gavai and Surya Kant.

There are more than 50 review petitions, which had challenged the judgement of the top court allowing the entry of women of all ages in the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. The petitions are pending before the apex court for final disposal.

Two other judges, Justices RF Nariman and DY Chandrachud, who ruled in favour of the entry of girls and women in the age group of 10-50 years in Sabarimala temple, are not part of the new bench. Justice Indu Malhotra, the sole dissenting and only woman judge in the bench which ruled that women are permitted to visit the shrine is also not a part of the new bench.

The top court had on January 6 issued a notice informing about the listing.

On December 13 last year, the Supreme Court had said that its 2018 order on Sabarimala temple issue was "not final" as the matter is pending before a seven-judge bench, which, it had said, will be constituted soon.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Bobde had made these observations while passing an order on a petition filed by two activists -- Bindu Ammini and Fathima A S -- seeking safe passage for women inside the shrine.

In 2018, the apex court had allowed girls and women of all age groups to visit the Lord Ayyappa temple at Sabarimala in Kerala, following which a batch of review petitions was filed.

Allowing their review petitions, the court had on November 14 referred the matter to a larger bench.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jan 13 2020 | 11:47 AM IST

Next Story