The Supreme Court decision to refer its September 28, 2018 order allowing women of all ages into the Lord Ayyappa temple in Sabarimala to a larger seven-judge bench has been welcomed by many.
Hailing the verdict, Kerala's Leader of the Opposition Ramesh Chennithala asked the Left-led state government "not to create issues" by providing security and taking women in the banned age group to offer worship at the Ayyappa temple.
"Just because there is no stay of the September 28 verdict, the LDF government must try not to create issues by providing security and allowing women to enter Sabarimala. The state government must not implement its earlier agenda of taking women in the banned age group to the hill shrine," he said.
The Supreme Court on Thursday said restrictions on women in religious places was not limited to Sabarimala alone and was prevalent in other religions as well as it referred all review pleas to a larger seven-judge bench.
Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, reading the verdict on behalf of himself and Justices A M Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra, said the larger bench will decide all such religious issues relating to Sabarimala, entry of women in mosques and practice of female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra community.
The state government is yet to react on the decision.
Former Chief Minister Oommen Chandy said the new decision will help in protecting the faith of devotees.
He also hoped the pilgrimage season will be peaceful.
Senior Congress leader Shashi Tharoor on Thursday welcomed the Supreme Court's decision to refer the "vexed" Sabarimala issue to a larger bench and said issues involved have implications for the practice of all faiths.
"I welcome the SC's decision to refer the vexed #Sabarimala issue to a larger benchThe issues involved have implications for the practice of all faiths," said Tharoor, who is an MP from Thiruvananthapuram.
Pandalam Royal family member Sasikumar Varma, one of the petitioners, said he was happy with the apex court's decision to review the September 28 verdict allowing women of all age groups to offer prayers at the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple.
"The court understood the feelings of the devotees and transferred the petitions to be reviewed by a seven-judge bench. This means there was some error in the earlier judgment. We feel relieved and happy that the SC has decided to review its earlier verdict. This is Lord Ayyappa's blessing," he said.
Senior BJP leader Kummanam Rajasekharan said the review petitions being referred to a seven-judge bench points to the fact that there was some apparent error in the earlier verdict.
"The government must show restraint and wait for the larger bench's verdict. In case women pilgrims in the banned age group try to offer worship, government must prevent them from doing so," Rajashekharan said.
Welcoming the verdict, Kandararu Rajeevaru, Head Priest of the Sabarimala temple, said he respects the SC decision to refer last September's verdict to a 7-judge bench.
"This gives us hope. This will strengthen the beliefs of devotees," he said.
Social activist Rahul Easwaran described it as "pro faith judgment".
Nobody should interfere in matters of faith, he added.
Trupti Desai plans second visit
Meanwhile, women's rights activist Trupti Desai said on Thursday that women should be allowed entry into the Sabarimala temple till the seven-judge SC bench delivers verdict on the issue, and vowed to offer prayers at the shrine when it is opened for worship.
"What I understand is that till the court order comes, entry is open for women and no one should protest against it. People who say that there is no discrimination at all are wrong, because women of specific ages are not allowed there. I am going to offer prayers on November 16," the Pune-based Desai told reporters after the SC verdict.
Desai had made an unsuccessful attempt to enter the temple in November last year, weeks after the Supreme Court lifted the ban that prevented women and girls between the age of 10 and 50 from entering the famous Ayyappa shrine in Kerala and held that the centuries-old Hindu religious practice was illegal and unconstitutional.
Women's rights activist Kavita Krishnan questioned why the review petition was sent to a larger bench.
"SC as a rule rejects review petitions...Review petition in Sec 377 was rejected. But #SabarimalaVerdict is referred to larger bench!...SC is giving us the distinct impression that verdicts, treatment of review petitions are influenced by what pleases/displeases those in power," she tweeted, referring to the court's judgement on consensual same-sex relationship.
Kerala had been rocked by violent protests after the LDF government decided to implement the Supreme Court verdict of September 28 last year allowing women of all age groups to offer prayers at the shrine.
While the five-judge bench unanimously agreed to refer the religious issues to a larger bench, it gave a 3:2 split decision on petitions seeking a review of the apex court's September 2018 decision allowing women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala shrine in Kerala.
The Sabarimala temple will be open from November 16 and the annual two-month-long pilgrim season will begin from November 17.
(With inputs from PTI.)
