Sabarimala Reference | Arguments Matrix

On 14 May, the nine-judge Constitution Bench reserved judgement in the Sabarimala Reference after 16 days of arguments. The Reference concerns constitutional questions arising from a 2018 judgement, where the Supreme Court held that customs barring entry of women between ages 10 and 50 into the Sabarimala Temple were unconstitutional. 

Over 50 review petitions were filed by religious organisations and devotees after the 2018 judgement. In 2019 a five-judge review bench referred several questions to a larger bench noting the judgement’s implications on other pending disputes: the bar on women’s entry into mosques among Muslims, exclusion of women from Fire Temples after interfaith marriage among Parsis and the practice of female genital mutilation (FGM) among Dawoodi Bohras.

The matter was listed before a nine-judge bench to decide the questions. Over 16 days, the parties debated the scope of judicial review in religion, the validity of the essential religious practices (ERP) test, constitutional morality as a tool for judicial scrutiny, and the conflict between individual religious rights and denominational autonomy under Articles 25 and 26. While parties criticised the ERP doctrine as unstable and lacking textual basis, they differed on whether the Court has the power to conduct limited inquiries to determine if a practice warrants constitutional protection.

In this matrix, we have summarised the key contentions. Find detailed arguments in our hearing reports.