SC’s Sabarimala Verdict a Letdown, But Also Gives Hope: Reactions

Video Editor: Purnendu Pritam

The Supreme Court referred judgment on the Sabarimala case to a 7-judge bench. This was with respect to 65 petitions that sought to re-examine the SC verdict of 2018 which lifted the ban on women (aged 10-50) from entering the Sabarimala temple sanctum.

There have been mixed reactions to the 'referred' judgement. But for now, women WILL be allowed to enter the temple.

Some people like right-wing activist Deepa Eshwar, BJP Mahila Morcha president, VT Rema and others hailed the SC’s decision to refer it for review.

While others were of the opinion that the SC should have upheld its earlier verdict and shouldn’t have referred to the larger bench for review.

“Out of the five judges (who pronounced the verdict today) Nariman and Chandrachud dismissed the petitions. We welcome that. We would’ve been very happy if the others had also done the same. While there are lakhs of cases still pending in the Supreme Court we would’ve been much happier if the court had strengthened the previous judgment and dismissed the review petitions.”

Selvi, Women’s rights activist

28 Years and Counting

The Sabarimala case has been ongoing for almost three decades now. It began with a writ petition by Mr Mahendran, in which he complained to the court that the Devaswom board in collusion with the government was allowing women of VIP families to enter the sanctum. The petitioner's contention was that this went against the rituals and traditions of the temple.

It was in response to this that the court set the 10-50 year age bar.

Merin Sarah Itty, a student, sees this as a matter of protecting constitutional rights.

“This could be taken in a positive sense. As a citizen of india I believe that constitutional rights should be given importance above anything else. Let us believe that these rights will be given importance and will be protected.”

Merin Sarah Itty, Student.