‘Are You Chief Priest?’ SC slams Sabarimala PIL petitioner
The Supreme Court of India rebuked the Indian Young Lawyers Association over its Sabarimala PIL, calling it an abuse of process and questioning its locus, while stressing focus on genuine public causes and bar welfare
New Delhi: “Are you the chief priest of the country?” The Supreme Court remarked on Tuesday while slamming the Indian Young Lawyers Association over its 2006 PIL challenging the prohibition of women aged 10 to 50 from entering the Sabarimala Temple in Kerala. The top court observed that the PIL was an “abuse of process of law” and the association should work for the bar and the welfare of its younger members rather than filing such PILs.
The observation of a nine-judge Constitution bench came while hearing petitions related to discrimination against women at religious places, including the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, and on the ambit and scope of the religious freedom practised by multiple faiths.
The bench comprised Chief Justice of India (CJI) 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. Advocate Ravi Prakash Gupta, appearing for the Indian Young Lawyers Association, submitted that there were four articles in the newspaper in June 2006, and the PIL was based on them. He argued that the association was not challenging the faith of Lord Ayyappa’s devotees but was upholding it.
As the lawyer proceeded with submissions, Justice Nagarathna observed, “How does a juristic body like yours have a belief? This is for an individual. You don’t have a conscience.” Justice Kumar also asked, “Has your organisation passed a resolution to file a PIL? Has your president signed it?” CJI Kant added, “Why have you filed this PIL? Are you the chief priest of the country?” The lawyer responded that the organisation is a registered body.
Referring to earlier submissions, the advocate said the temple’s tantri (priest) has mentioned that young women should not be permitted to enter the temple as the deity doesn’t like young ladies. He also expressed strong objections to references made by three judges regarding the nine-judge bench.
Justice Nagarathna then remarked, “Young Lawyers Association has no other business? They can’t work for the welfare of the bar or assist the bench for the legal system of this country? “Work for the bar, work for younger members and for their welfare.
Those who are struggling in rural areas have difficulty coming to the cities to argue cases. They have brilliant minds. People have come from the villages with different minds. Rather than doing this time, in the Supreme Court,” she said.
The hearing is underway. A five-judge Constitution bench had lifted the ban preventing women between the ages of 10 and 50 from entering the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple in a 4:1 majority verdict in September 2018, ruling that the centuries-old Hindu religious practice was illegal and unconstitutional.
