New Delhi, April 4 A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court is scheduled to commence hearings on petitions relating to discrimination against women in religious places, including the Sabarimala Temple, and on the scope and extent of religious freedom practiced by multiple faiths, starting from April 7.
According to the Supreme Court's cause list of April 7, the nine-judge Constitution bench will comprise Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices B V Nagarathna, M M Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Augustine George Masih, Prasanna B Varale, R Mahadevan, and Joymalya Bagchi.
In September 2018, a five-judge Constitution bench, by a 4:1 majority verdict, had lifted the ban that prevented women between the ages of 10 and 50 from entering the Ayyappa shrine at Sabarimala in Kerala, and held that the centuries-old Hindu religious practice was illegal and unconstitutional.
Later, on November 14, 2019, another five-judge bench, headed by then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, by a majority of 3:2, referred the issue of discrimination against women at various places of worship to a larger bench.
The bench had then framed broad issues concerning religious freedom, stating that they could not be decided without considering the specific facts of the case.
Besides the Sabarimala case, the verdict also referred issues of Muslim women entering mosques and dargahs, and of Parsi women, married to non-Parsi men, to the holy fire place of an Agiary, to a larger bench.
On May 11, 2020, another bench held that its five-judge bench had the power to refer legal questions to a larger bench for adjudication, while exercising its limited power under review jurisdiction in the Sabarimala temple entry case.
On February 16, the top court had announced that it would commence the final hearing on April 7, and the hearing was expected to conclude on April 22.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the Centre had said he supported the pleas for review of the Sabarimala verdict that allowed entry of women of all age groups to the hill-top shrine in Kerala.
Earlier, the top court had read out seven questions it had framed on the scope of religious freedom.
Asserting that it was open to adding or deleting issues, the bench had said it would consider: "What is the scope and extent of the right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India?"
Regarding the second issue, it said: "What is the interplay between the rights of persons under Article 25 of the Constitution of India and the rights of religious denominations under Article 26?"
The third question is whether the rights of a religious denomination under Article 26 are subject to other fundamental rights, 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 does it include constitutional morality?" read the fourth question.
The bench had said it would also examine the "scope and extent of judicial review," concerning a religious practice as referred under Article 25 of the Constitution.
"What is the meaning of the expression "sections of Hindus" occurring in Article 25 (2) (b) of the Constitution of India?" read the sixth issue.
The top court had said it would examine, as the seventh question, 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 public interest litigation (PIL).
It had said the larger bench would have to evolve a judicial policy to achieve "substantial and complete justice" in matters of freedom of religion, such as restrictions on the entry of Muslim and Parsi women into their places of worship.