Sabarimala Verdict Out: SC refers issue to larger bench in 3:2 verdict

CJI Ranjan Gogoi has said the issue must be referred to larger bench of seven judges, since it is not isolated to Sabarimala verdict alone, but women belonging to other communities as well.

The verdict that was put forth for review by the Supreme Court last year has been referred to a larger bench. Justices Nariman and Chandrachud dissented in the 3:2 verdict.

He started the ruling saying it would take five minutes to read out completely. "The petitioner's endeavour is to revive the argument. What is perceived as faith in one group, may not be perceived by another group."

Sabarimala issue is not an isolated issue - but also is in connection to allowing Muslim women seeking permission to enter mosques and Borah women pertaining to the case of genital mutilation. This requires a larger bench.

In the last review, with a majority verdict of 4:1, the apex court in September 2018 lifted the ban preventing women devotees between the age of 10 and 50 from entering the Ayyappa shrine in Kerala. It deemed that the centuries-old religious practice is illegal and unconstitutional.

The SC is scheduled to pronounce its verdict on a batch of petitions seeking re-examination of its decision to allow entry of women of all age groupS into the temple. Judgment will be delivered on 65 petitions which include 56 review petitions, four fresh writ petitions and five transfer pleas which were filed after the verdict sparked violent protests in Kerala.