Sabarimala review petitions hearing likely to be deferred
With one of the judges from the bench on medical leave, the Supreme Court on Tuesday said it may not take up hearing on January 22 petitions seeking review of the judgment permitting women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala shrine.
By : migrator
Update: 2019-01-15 18:49 GMT
New Delhi
A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said that Justice Indu Malhotra, the lone woman judge of the five-judge constitution bench which had delivered the verdict in the Sabarimala case is on leave on medical grounds.
"Justice Indu Malhotra is on leave due to some medical reasons," the bench said.
Justice Malhotra is the lone woman judge in the five-judge Constitution bench scheduled to hear the petitions against the landmark September 28 verdict that generated passions in Kerala, with traditionalists and the Hindu rightwing openly opposing the ruling.
The bench, which also comprised Justices L Nageswara Rao and S K Kaul, said that the hearing, which is scheduled to start from January 22, may not take place.
The observation came after lawyer Mathews J Nedumpara mentioned the case and sought live streaming of hearing on the petitions seeking review of the apex court's verdict allowing all women inside Sabarimala temple, on January 22.
The apex court bench also comprising Justices Rohinton Fali Nariman, A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud on November 13 had decided to go for open court hearings of the 49 petitions seeking a recall of the verdict.
A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by then Chief Justice Dipak Misra had junked the age-old tradition of the Lord Ayyappa temple by a majority verdict of 4:1.
It said that the ban on women in the menstruating age group, whose presence at the Sabarimala temple was considered "impure", violated their fundamental rights and constitutional guarantee of equality.
The petitioners seeking recall of the verdict argued that besides "patent legal errors" in the verdict, the assumption that the temple practice was based on notions of menstrual impurity was factually erroneous.
Pointing to the massive protests against the verdict by women worshippers, the petitioners contended that these "clearly demonstrate that overwhelmingly large section of women worshippers are supporting the custom of prohibiting entry of women".
(With inputs from PTI)
Visit news.dtnext.in to explore our interactive epaper!
Download the DT Next app for more exciting features!
Click here for iOS
Click here for Android