Review of Sabarimala verdict: SC declines urgent hearing

Review of Sabarimala verdict: SC declines urgent hearing
The five-judge Constitution bench had said banning the entry of women into the shrine was gender discrimination

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Tuesday declined urgent hearing on a plea seeking review of its verdict allowing women of all age groups entry into the Sabarimala Temple.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph had considered the submission of Shylaja Vijayan, president, National Ayyappa Devotees Association. The petition had contended that the five-judge Constitution bench verdict lifting the ban was 'absolutely untenable and irrational'.

The five-judge Constitution bench headed by then Chief Justice Dipak Misra, had in its 4:1 verdict, said banning the entry of women into the shrine is gender discrimination and that the practice violates rights of Hindu women.  

Demands raised in petition:

• The court verdict is faulty and hence the review petitions should be heard as writ pleas

• Permission should be granted to present new facts and evidence and to cite legal aspects

• A logical and proper verdict should be issued then

The urgent hearing was sought as the court closes on Wednesday for 10 days for the Navarathri Pooja holidays. The temple reopens for rituals on October 18.

The petition also argued that the court has not heard the version of crores of Ayyappa devotees before arriving on its decision. All facts were not considered, including the basic argument that Lord Ayyappa is a celibate, the petition contended.

Read more: Latest Kerala news

The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Onmanorama. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.