Sabarimala Hearing Live: PILs should be discouraged in matters of religion, Travancore Devaswom Board tells SC
On September 28, 2018, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court, by a 4:1 majority, lifted the age restriction on women visitors.
by Ashish Shaji, Jagriti Rai · The Indian Express · JoinSupreme Court on Sabarimala Women Entry Case Hearing Live Updates: The Supreme Court is hearing the pleas concerning discrimination against women at religious places, including the Sabarimala temple, and the scope of religious freedom under the Constitution.
Nine-judge bench: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant will preside over the bench, which will include Justices B V Nagarathna, M M Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Augustine George Masih, Prasanna B Varale, R Mahadevan and Joymalya Bagchi.
Story continues below this ad
Questions for consideration: The 7 questions for consideration before the court are:
- What is the scope and ambit of the right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India?
- What is the interplay between the rights of persons under Article 25 of the Constitution and the rights of religious denominations under Article 26?
- Whether the rights of a religious denomination under Article 26 of the Constitution are subject to other provisions of Part III of the Constitution, apart from public order, morality and health?
- What is the scope and extent of the word ‘morality’ under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution, and whether it is meant to include constitutional morality?
- What is the scope and extent of judicial review with regard to a religious practice as referred to in Article 25 of the Constitution?
- What is the meaning of the expression “Sections of Hindus” occurring in Article 25 (2) (b) of the Constitution?
- Whether a person not belonging to a religious denomination or religious group can question a practice of that religious denomination or religious group by filing a PIL?
Live Updates
Apr 15, 2026 05:12 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Hearing ends
Hearing will now resume tomorrow
Apr 15, 2026 05:11 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: I am not saying these PIL petitioners women should go to other temples. I am saying on a valid classification you can be excluded from what you are antithetical...But you have equal access to 1499 other temples that's all I am saying. I am not saying you can never do darshan of Lord Ayyappa. But this particular form of Lord Ayyappa is not worshipped anywhere else and if the belief which nobody says is imaginary belief Lord Ayyappa represents brahmacharya in its highest form if that belief is genuine then how can I or she or PIL petitioner can question that belief in PIL petition
Apr 15, 2026 05:03 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: The main argument is that we are excluding females. First, remember, there is no exclusion of females. Females below 10 and above 50 are allowed. So it is not gender per se. Second argument is within the band of 10 to 50, you are making a sub-classification of females who cannot go.
Now, if I am able to show in Articles 14 and 15 that this exclusion of fertile females between the age of 10 and 50, their denial has a direct nexus with the object, identity and manifestation of the deity, then it is a valid classification, that is a legal argument when it goes to the facts. The validity of a classification between women below 10 and above 50 on one hand versus women between 10 and 50 has to be judged with what you are discussing. You are not discussing a toy shop. You are not discussing a restaurant. You are not discussing some other deity who has no connection. He is a celibate eternal brahmachari, who forbids all forms of grihastha ashram. Now, therefore, you can argue why it is not 11 years, why not 49 years. It is assumed that fertile women in this age would be antithetical to the very manifestation and existence of identity of the deity. You might not have Lord Ayeppa as a eternal brahmacharya, but these women can certainly visit Lord Ayyappa in 999 other temples. If they are so concerned in a PIL, why should they want to visit this one temple. So, you will apply these tests if you come down to pure law 17, 14 etc exclusion has a direct valid, real and genuine nexus with the identity of the temple you are discussing.
Apr 15, 2026 04:58 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions on PIL jurisdiction
Singhvi: This Lord Ayyappa, I am told, has about 1,000 temples in India. Somebody says 1,499, somebody says 1,000. Let us not get into that. The only sole temple of Lord Ayyappa which has him in one form as a naisthika brahmachari, the word naisthika means an eternal brahmachari, is the only temple which worships Lord Ayyappa in that form. Now, the very foundation of the fame and the prowess of this deity is only in the form of naisthika brahmacharya. The only reason people revere him is because he has eschewed all forms of grihastha ashram and has adopted penance of a very high order, which includes celibacy and self denial completely to an extreme position.
Apr 15, 2026 04:56 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions on PIL jurisdiction
Justice Nagarathna: Will you say that he has no locus standi at all?
Singhvi: That's my heading. That's the heading of this section...Absolutely yes
Apr 15, 2026 04:46 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: CJI interjects
CJI: These are all extreme, exceptional cases. Why should the Court even wait for a PIL. Why cannot the Court take suo motu action. The first constitutional dharma of a constitutional court is that if this thing happens why you wait for a PIL why cant you take suo motu.
Singhvi: That, however, does not mean that PIL becomes a vehicle for interpreting either a religious practice or its violation by public authorities. That cannot. So your lordship's threshold for entertaining that kind of PIL. It will be ten times higher than normal PILs.
Apr 15, 2026 04:44 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Justice Bagchi: The question is whether a person, in exercise of PIL jurisdiction, can approach the Court with regard to a particular religious element. My question to you is if ex-facie or otherwise the religious practice or religious affairs of management transgress the laxman rekha of public order or health or morality, how will the courts refrain themselves from entertaining?
Singhvi: I will not give a per se answer. I concede that I cannot argue that per se will never ever will a PIL lie. In the example Justice Bagchi gave possibly it may lie
Apr 15, 2026 04:40 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions on PIL jurisdiction
Singhvi: If a person says my religion allows me to kill people or do something, then the state will come up with something or some law and order is there...PIL can come and this is extreme example but these are not cases. Sabarimala 200 years old. Guruvayur so many years old. Somebody comes and files a PIL saying this practice is bad.
Apr 15, 2026 04:37 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions on PIL jurisdiction
Singhvi: In matters of religion the normal and predominant role should be to discourage PILs
Apr 15, 2026 04:27 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Justice Amanullah: Why can't constitutional morality be interpreted to mean differently and to be interpreted in different ways and scenarios. Why is the blanket constitutional...not read at all into. We could define that there could be parameters and different type of readings what actually constitutional morality would be
Singhvi: I have said repeatedly to the extent that in intestists of constitutional silence with no competing law or directly occupying legislation or delegated legislation where lordships finds that your lordships can rely on conventions, on spirit, on legacy. Your lordships can.
Justice Amanullah: The definition itself should not be straightjacket. It's a fluid concept. The emphasis is more on what happened in 70- 75 years ago in debates.....someone wanted to introduce and someone did not want to.
Singhvi: If your lordship were to elevate and use constitutional morality as it is used in four cases, Manoj Narula, NCT 1, 2 and Navtej where it is being used to invalidate and dilute legislation then i will say it is wrong. Why it is wrong your lordship will use the origin of Ambedkar. I am not saying your lordship cannot evolve that doctrine. But why this use is misuse is because it has no connection with the concept of Dr Ambedkar
Apr 15, 2026 04:12 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Your lordships may have to overrule this formulation page 97 of Sabarimala... "As for morality, it is settled law that Article 25 speaks of constitutional morality and not societal morality." If your lordship lets it be as it is, it is a very major its like Justice Khare doctrine. This is completely wrong. Now, this ofcourse is possibly a dissenting judgment. In some parts he is with the majority, in some parts he is not. But this should be clearly clarified and eliminated. Justice Nariman has got it right in paragraph 155 in this very case Sabarimala, where I had the privilege of opening the case and we lost three two in the original judgment. Justice Nariman is part of the majority. It is now under review.
Apr 15, 2026 04:03 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: CJI interjects
CJI: The danger of constitutional morality in this context will be the unmanageable standards of judging it
Singhvi: It's not an unruly horse..its a dinosaur which your lords cannot ride
CJI: It needs complete subjectivity and individual opinion
Apr 15, 2026 03:58 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Even our words in the constitution were vague words in 1950 when the constitution came, but your lordship has created a jurisprudence of 70 years and 80 years, which is given flesh and blood, so we follow that. Now, today, we have a new word, which does not have a legacy of jurisprudence, and your lordships again started to follow generally vague terms. So at the highest if your lordship were to preserve it your lordship should use the famous phrase of Michael...constitutional silences, constitutional pauses
Nagarathna: In other words, you are saying on the touchstone of constitutional morality, you cannot say a religious practice is bad?
Singhvi: Last and least about the religious practice. Worst use of constitutional morality, according to me, it is bad everywhere...In the area of Articles 25 and 26, it can have a disastrous effect. Let me be as frank as possible. If you bring it, let me use it in a lighter way; it will be a bull in the china shop. The China shop is 25 and 26, and bull being constitutional morality. It will not fit in and it should not be allowed to enter
Apr 15, 2026 03:45 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Justice Bagchi: Idea of constitutional morality when you apply to Article 25, 26 is actually regulating non-state actors, whether we apply the test of constitutional morality, when we examine the religions practices or religious affairs or management of religious affairs by non state actors.
Singhvi: I would say that the moment your lordships' entitlement to look at religion and religious practices only in a subjective or objective test, the way I said in the morning, with the prism looking through the eyes of the adherent, any doctrine like constitutional morality brings in an external standard, whether by private or non-private actors and becomes very dangerous.
Justice Bagchi: That is what we want, a clearer submission on this that when you see Dr Ambedkar's reference to constitutional morality, constitutional morality being referred in SP Gupta as conventions, practices of constitution or statutory or order of governance will that same standard be applied when we apply morality as expressed in article 26..when we are examining them against the backdrop of non state actors that is to say there will be a horizontal applicability
Singhvi: My response is an emphatic no, a very clear no. Look at the kind of repercussions your lordships query if observed in the yes would have just kindly consider. Your lordship has a derogation given in 25 of morality. Now please apply another standard called constitutional morality in Article 25(1). My Lord has a exception of morality in Article 26. Third, religious practices, which all of us from this side of the argument agree should be viewed through the prism of the adherent, which is largely a subjective view with some objective standards, will now be decided by constitutional morality.
Apr 15, 2026 03:33 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi now addresses the court on- What is the scope and extent of the word ‘morality’ under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution, and whether it is meant to include constitutional morality?
Apr 15, 2026 03:31 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Number four, the framers consciously used morality. Why did they not use the constitutional morality? Your lordships cannot rewrite it is a term of the art. By adding the word to the term of part, there is confusion created. There is already a term of art called morality
Bench: 19 2 it is there
Singhvi: 25 also. Point is your lordships never thought of using constitutional morality. If they were concerned about Dr Ambedkar's one sentence in a different context they would have put it there
Apr 15, 2026 03:28 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Third, constitutional morality was never dreamt by anyone as an additional ground of derogation
Apr 15, 2026 03:27 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: So this is on constitutional morality. My propositions are -one Constitutional morality is not used in the constitution anywhere. Two, Dr Ambedkar, whose passage is frequently quoted used it to justify one allegation or question raised against him, why do you providing such a detailed constitution integrity, why not a broad constitution. He said in a nation republic like India where constitutional morality maybe a superficial top soil but not embedded in the sub soil, it is necessary to provide details of administration, which over time inculcate and create a morality, which does not exit today.
Apr 15, 2026 03:19 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: If you make a law for social reform which doesn't hollow out religion then that will also prevail over 26 b...26 is consciously freed from the fetters of other provision of this part which means the gamut of 14 to 32 minus what is put inside..
Bench: That means 25 2 b has to be only with the object of maintaining public order morality and health..because that's in both
Singhvi: That doesn't require discussion. Further in addition, fourthly 26 b is subject to law throwing open Hindu religious institution of a public character to all classes. That also 26 b will subordinate it to....Fifth, it may also be subject to the first five words of 25 2 b provided the legal reform or social welfare reform does not hollow out the religion out of existence or identity
Apr 15, 2026 03:11 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Bench: What I am telling you is this consciously the constitution doesn't refer to subject to other part because it goes without saying that what is in article 25 will apply to 26 also, otherwise it doesn't make sense. You can say it will apply to A person B, C, D but doesn't apply to the....created by them
Apr 15, 2026 03:09 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Bench: What is a religious denomination? Its a group of believers...article 25 2 will apply or not?
Singhvi: It will apply
Bench: If you apply article 25 2 to them how do you say it will not apply to the denomination? Afterall denomination has its life and existence because of the belief, a collective belief who gave protection and preservation
Singhvi: I am not saying that
Apr 15, 2026 03:04 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: It is evident from the opening sentences of 26 in contrast that 26 has not been made subject to other provisions of part 3 unlike 25. Analysis of the debate would reveal that the framers had consciously and intentionally not made 26 subject to other provision
Apr 15, 2026 03:01 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi now addresses the third question- Whether the rights of a religious denomination under Article 26 of the Constitution are subject to other provisions of Part III of the Constitution, apart from public order, morality and health?
Apr 15, 2026 03:00 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Bench: Its a matter of degree. You are saying they can enter all classes can enter but not to the Sanctum sanctorum
Singhvi: It will be a substantive difference. A law will say you are authorised to enter whereas 26 b rule may say you cannot enter. So there will be direct conflict where your lordships will have to decide 25 2 b govern the second part
Apr 15, 2026 02:53 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Singhvi (reads written submissions): The access is to the compound and to the entry not to the inner most Sanctum sanctorum would still be protected by 26 b...
Justice Nagarathna: One other way to look at it is 25 2 b is with regard to social reform. Social reform is different from religious reform
Singhvi: 25 2 b has two parts one is social reform and welfare one is entry
Justice Nagarathna: The first five words, it is not religious reform. Law cannot be made for religious reform law can be made for social reform in religious institutions
Apr 15, 2026 02:49 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Other provisions will include article 26 also, we have to remember
Bench: Even 25 (2)
Singhvi: yes yes
Apr 15, 2026 02:48 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi (reads written submissions): Denominations and even section thereof understood in widest possible sense are protected under 26. Management of affairs of denominations or section thereof cannot be diluted or deprived by the legislature which can regulate administration of property associated with religion and religious practices. In case of conflict between individual right under 25 1 and right of denomination under 26, right of denomination will prevail as article 25 1 is subject to other provisions of part III which includes 26
Apr 15, 2026 02:42 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi (reads written submissions): The rights guaranteed under under 25 and 26 came for consideration before the court in several cases and the main principles underlining the provision is that the protection of this articles is not limited to matters of doctrine or belief but they also extends to act done in pursuance of religion and therefore contain a guarantee for rituals and observances ceremonies and modes of worships which are integral part
Apr 15, 2026 02:36 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: My submission is that...when your lordship is laying down the law according to me it is entirely possible to lay down the law saying that you cannot take it out of existence recognition or hollow out as your lordship say without losing the essentiality test...
Apr 15, 2026 02:33 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: It is my case that social reform and welfare must be allowed contrary to my learned friend and first five words must be given meaning
CJI: While social welfare reform are preserved by the constitution, in the name of social welfare may not be preserved..
Justice Nagarathna: In the name of social welfare and reform you cannot...out the religion
Singhvi: That's the point so you are deciding whether social welfare maintains the religion or converts it into non-religion, not that social reform is doing essentiality or non-essentiality
Apr 15, 2026 02:26 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Exchange
Justice Sundresh: How do you explain the word public character?
Singhvi: A temple by law, antiquity, fame, generation, or whatever may have started private can become institution of public character.
Apr 15, 2026 02:20 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: You cannot use the first five words to take away the 25 (1) out of identity, recognition or existence. You cannot use this
Apr 15, 2026 02:19 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: The first five words of 25 2 b. It is easy to say that it is coloured by the later words...There were independent words and separated by a conjunction called and
Apr 15, 2026 02:06 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Singhvi for TDB
Singhvi continues his submissions for TDB
Apr 15, 2026 02:05 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Court assembles
Court assembles after break
Apr 15, 2026 01:04 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Court rises for lunch break
Bench: We will continue at 2
Court rises
Apr 15, 2026 12:58 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Obviously you can't apply the same test to 26
Justice Nagarathna: Article 25 is essentially with regard to equality of all religions, no religion is superior to the other…the persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience. Ekam Sat Vipra Bahudha Vadanti. The truth is one, scholars interpret in different ways, which is why everybody is entitled to their conscience, which is expressed in 25(1). No conscience is superior to any other conscience, no path is superior to any other path. The call is one ekam sath, but the callers, gurus, whatever you made, take you to a different path. You may follow any path you wish
Singhvi: You don't superimpose a validity of one path on the other...In Hinduism we have this tradition that people used to think earlier that Bhakti path is in some sense inferior to the gyaan path...So Mirabai's path of Bhakti is of equal validity as the gyaan path
Singhvi: I am only saying a narrow thing there could be cases where the exercise by an individual which is 25 1 of his 25 1 right which is to profess, practice and propagate religion conflicts with 14 may be some part of 19...and your lordships finds that after all your attempts you cannot reconcile it, then that's the question we are addressing what you do, you have to give primacy to that phrase subject to because the framers put it there after thinking and they chose not to put in 26 thats all i am saying that difference is there. But before your reach that end corner of being...you will strain yourself very badly to harmonise
Apr 15, 2026 12:56 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: There may be cases where my individual rights of 25 so irreconcilably violates 14 so irreconcilably violates may be particular part of 19 where your lordships can't harmonise then the framers clearly intended that 25 will give way to that but that's oversimplifying before you reach that irreconcilable stage you have to strain yourself backwards to harmonise that's the proposition I am giving
Apr 15, 2026 12:35 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Bench: So you are saying 25 2 a is a sort of an exception to freedom under article 26?
Singhvi: 25 2 b
Bench: Sorry 25 2 b
Singhvi: It is an exception in the sense for all issues regulating entry you have to go to 25 2 b. Once you enter 26 takes over
Apr 15, 2026 12:33 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: If the collective belief of that religion or denomination doesn't permit anybody except him to do worship then i cant insist...All what i have said will not apply to a truly private temple...Private temples actually are very few. They have to be genuinely private. There are a lot of so called private temples which become so famous by customs, usage over the years, and the footfalls and the veneration, that they are actually public temples. In a public temple, all these principles apply. However, obviously, if it is in a home, a private temple or somebody’s own domestic arrangement, this will not apply. Neither Article 25(2)(a) nor Article 25(2)(b) can be invoked.
Apr 15, 2026 12:32 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: After you enter, 26 will take over
Apr 15, 2026 12:31 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: 25 2 b has to be limited to "throwing open of Hindu institution of a public character". Therefore the word entry has to be governed by 25 2 b. All forms of entry, main gate, compound, access
Apr 15, 2026 12:26 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Federalism is part of basic strcture...is nowhere found in the constitution text...fraternity though a word in preamble is least used least applied
Bench: Least understood
Singhvi: Yes. I would say this concept of religion must cross fertilise with fraternity. Without that this doesn't work.
Apr 15, 2026 12:22 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: In any form of obscenity and moral you cannot be allowed to roam naked...Digambar Jains even today in big functions the actual sadhus will come completely naked and there are large number of women at that function....Digambar Jain by that set of standards should be abolished...Nudity in all other forms is proscribed. But it is nobody's case that Mahavir who was elder contemporary of Buddha...This whole thing will be abolished because your lordship finds abhorrent
Apr 15, 2026 12:14 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: The moment...allows use the word 'essential' your lordship starts operating withing the subsuming rubric of a concept called religion
Apr 15, 2026 12:06 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Bench: Ultimately under section 25 (2) (a) religious practices cannot be touched
Apr 15, 2026 12:03 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Let me summarise. Firstly the distinction has to be religious versus non religious
Apr 15, 2026 12:01 PM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: It should be clarified that the existence of..religious belief or religion is certainly in your lordship's domain but... not on objective test
Apr 15, 2026 11:57 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Whether it is religious or non-religious, or as lordship puts it, is religious or secular, is an inquiry, but that inquiry was also limited by looking through the prism of religious adherence, not by the objective prism of the judge
Justice Nagarathna: Or another way of saying this is that anything which does not come within the scope of Article 25(2)(a) has to be protected.
Apr 15, 2026 11:54 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Bench: For what purpose this essential religious practices as a test was propounded by this court to mean that only that is protected and nothing else
Singhvi: According to me, it is slightly loose language used in Dargah committee judgment , which was picked up and taken as it occurred. Let me explain the very first thing. What they mean everywhere, possibly in Dargah, is that we are entitled to decide whether it is religion or not. We are entitled to decide whether it is religion or not.
Apr 15, 2026 11:49 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: The beliefs and practice of community have to be judged by subjective belief of the community and the court is bound to accept the belief and not to sit in judgment
Apr 15, 2026 11:48 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench interjects
Bench: Here it is between relationship man and God...that is not there (in his submissions) commonality in practices
Apr 15, 2026 11:45 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Article 16(5) is intended to be an exception to Article 16(2) and other parts, inasmuch as such religious or denominational institutions can restrict, by virtue of Article 16(5), appointments to offices or governing bodies. Article 16(5), however, does not immunise, this is my submission, from the charge of discrimination those appointments on other discriminatory standards of race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, provided such persons are of the same religion and denomination as the institution.
Apr 15, 2026 11:36 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi is appearing on behalf of Travancore Devaswom Board
Apr 15, 2026 11:35 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: Mr Vaidyanathan said that 16(5) was not looked at and therefore Seshammal (Seshammal and Others v. State of Tamil Nadu) would have to be overruled....I am taking a different view I am suggesting that Seshammal can be harmonised with Article 16(5) and the rest of Article 16.
Apr 15, 2026 11:33 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: To think of religion only a set of beliefs is wrong. It will include ceremonial law, installation of idols
Singhvi quotes the S P Mittal v Union of India case, which observed that religion is primarily a question of the consciousness of the community.
Apr 15, 2026 11:29 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi addresses the court on the first issue framed- What is the scope and ambit of the right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India?
Singhvi: Religion is a set of beliefs and practices followed by a group, sect, or denomination with a broadly similar identity. While Article 25 clearly vests in an individual the right to profess, practise and propagate religion, such individual rights cannot be allowed to extend into an area which encroaches upon the mass of individual rights of all other adherents of that religion or denomination. This is just a summary. I will be elaborating these submissions in a moment. This was a).
b) The beliefs and practices of the community are to be judged by the specific beliefs of the community. The court is bound to accept the belief of the community, provided it is genuine and exists, is not fanciful, nor imaginary. It is not for the court to sit in judgment on that belief.
Third, it is impermissible to add, modify or subtract from the specific constitutional text and accordingly, the additional derogation, or so-called derogation, of essentiality as engrafted by some judgments is entirely impermissible. This will be dealt with, but I will only deal with that part of my note which has not been dealt with. Those cases have not been dealt with. I will not repeat those.
(Fourth)The permissible restrictions or derogations for the right to practise, profess and propagate religion found in Article 25 were arrived at after detailed and meticulous deliberations in the Assembly. Any other explicit or implied dilution of the right by interposition of other judicial restrictions would break down the delicate and intricate system of checks and balances envisioned by the framers.
Last, the rights of persons under Article 25 are to be read harmoniously with the phrase “other provisions of this Part”. So one cannot lead to the vanishing point of the other is going to be my submission.
Apr 15, 2026 11:29 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Hearing begins
Singhvi: There will be a slight digression where i will give a corrigendum of hard copy in light of what i have heard
Apr 15, 2026 11:28 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Sr adv Singhvi's submissions
Singhvi: It (submissions) will be entirely on law
Apr 15, 2026 11:24 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Hearing begins
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi begins submissions for Travancore Devanswom Board
Apr 15, 2026 11:23 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Bench assembles
Nine-judge bench assembles
Apr 15, 2026 11:05 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Ceremonial bench
Ceremonial bench proceedings is going on for Justice Rajesh Bindal who demits office today
Apr 15, 2026 10:50 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Senior advocate CS Vaidyanathan
Senior advocate CS Vaidyanathan has also concluded submissions on behalf of different review petitioners- Nair service society which has been representing the devotees, Ayyappa Seva Samajam, Kerala Kshethra Samrakshana Samithi (devotees organisation in Kerala), and Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha.
Apr 15, 2026 10:37 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: SG Mehta's arguments
Mehta had earlier pointed to several instances where restrictions operate against men, noting that there are temples where men are not allowed entry. He further added that there are temples where male priests are under a religious mandate to wash the feet of female devotees.
Apr 15, 2026 10:35 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Nine-judge bench to resume hearing
The nine judge bench which began hearing on April 7 heard the arguments by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on behalf of Central government who had argued that the right to enter a temple must be examined in the context of the rights of devotees who believe that a particular class of persons should not be permitted entry, adding that this aspect has not been considered at all.
Mehta had also contended that the Sabarimala judgment proceeds on an assumption that men are superior and women occupy a lower pedestal.
Apr 15, 2026 10:27 AM IST
Supreme Court Hearing on Sabarimala Women Entry Live Updates: Nine-judge bench to resume hearing
A nine-judge bench will shortly resume Day 4 hearing of the Sabarimala reference
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments