The Supreme Court’s latest Sabarimala hearing is no longer only about women’s entry into one temple. It could shape how Indian courts handle future clashes between religious freedom, denominational rights, equality, dignity and the Constitution’s promise of non-exclusion
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court is hearing a case that began with the Sabarimala temple dispute but now raises a much larger constitutional question: when a religious custom appears to conflict with fundamental rights such as equality and dignity, how far can courts go in examining it?
The immediate dispute took root in 2018, when the Supreme Court struck down the practice of barring women of menstruating age from entering the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. But what is now before the court is not simply another hearing on women’s entry. The bench is expected to examine a broader set of constitutional questions that grew out of that ruling, including the relationship between religious freedom, the rights of religious denominations, equality, dignity, and the extent to which courts can review a practice said to be essential to a faith.