Former Devaswom Minister Kadakampally Surendran sparked political speculation after a surprise 15-minute meeting with Kerala Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala. The meeting comes as the SIT finalizes its chargesheet in the alleged Sabarimala gold scam
The Supreme Court refused to adjourn the hearing on petitions challenging the 2023 law governing appointments of election commissioners. The court termed the matter important and continued proceedings despite the Centre seeking deferment due to the ongoing nine-judge Sabarimala reference case
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
The Supreme Court of India criticised misuse of PILs as “private, publicity, paisa and political interest litigation” while hearing the Sabarimala case, stressing only genuine public causes deserve consideration amid concerns over frivolous petitions
The Supreme Court of India, while hearing religious freedom cases including Sabarimala, remarked it respects expert opinions but rejects “WhatsApp University” sources. The bench discussed limits of judicial assessment of religious practices and gender-based entry restrictions at temples
The Supreme Court of India said it can review State actions restricting religious practices in the name of reform, despite limits on judicial review, during hearings in the Sabarimala temple case on balancing faith and fundamental rights
The Supreme Court’s nine-judge Constitution Bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, continued hearings on the Sabarimala review reference, focusing on the tension between religious freedom and fundamental rights. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the Travancore Devaswom Board, argued against the “essential religious practices” doctrine.
The Travancore Devaswom Board told the Supreme Court that courts cannot judge religious beliefs of denominations. During the Sabarimala hearing, it argued that practices must be determined by the community, while the court continues to examine issues of religious freedom and equality
The Centre told the Supreme Court that the 2018 Sabarimala judgement was based on the assumption that men are superior, while defending restrictions on women’s entry and highlighting religious practices as a key factor in the ongoing constitutional bench hearing
The Akhil Bharatiya Sant Samiti has moved the Supreme Court seeking intervention in the Sabarimala review case, arguing that courts should not decide essential religious practices. It said faith-based traditions must be protected unless they violate public order, morality or health
The Sabarimala women’s entry issue resurfaced in Kerala ahead of a Supreme Court hearing, triggering a political debate. The opposition demanded clarity from the LDF government, while ruling party leaders said the stand would be revealed in court
