New Delhi: On Monday, Supreme Court said it would not consider the review pleas challenging the women's entry at Sabarimala. Instead, it decided to consider the seven questions raised by the earlier five-judge bench.
"We are not hearing review pleas of Sabarimala case. We are considering issues referred to by a 5-judge bench earlier," the nine-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice S A Bobde, said.
Here are the seven questions to be considered by the Supreme Court.
1. Regarding the interplay between the freedom of religion under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution and other provisions in Part III, particularly Article 14.
2.What is the sweep of expression ‘public order, morality and health’ occurring in Article 25(1) of the Constitution.
3.The expression ‘morality’ or ‘constitutional morality’ has not been defined in the Constitution. Is it over arching morality in reference to preamble or limited to religious beliefs or faith.
There is need to delineate the contours of that expression, lest it becomes subjective.
4. The extent to which the court can enquire into the issue of a particular practice is an integral part of the religion or religious practice of a particular religious denomination or should that be left exclusively to be determined by the head ofthe section of the religious group.
5. What is the meaning of the expression ‘sections of Hindus’ appearing in Article 25(2)(b) of the Constitution.
6.Whether the “essential religious practices” of a religious denomination, or even a section thereof are afforded constitutional protection under Article 26.
7.What would be the permissible extent of judicial recognition to PILs in matters calling into question religious practices of a denomination or a section thereof at the instance of persons who do not belong to such religious denomination?
Background
The apex court had on November 14 asked a larger bench to re-examine various religious issues, including the entry of women into the Sabarimala Temple and mosques and the practice of female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra community.
The Supreme Court in its judgement on the Sabarimala review petition dated November 14, 2019 said that the issues arising in the aforementioned pending cases may be overlapping and covered by the judgment under review.
2018 verdict
A majority verdict by then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices A M Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra decided to keep pending pleas seeking a review of its decision regarding entry of women into the shrine, and said restrictions on women in religious places was not restricted to Sabarimala alone and was prevalent in other religions as well.
The minority verdict by Justices R F Nariman and D Y Chandrachud gave a dissenting view by dismissing all review pleas and directing compliance of its September 28 decision.
