1. Home
2. Letters

SC should have stayed its own verdict on Sabrimala Temple by all reasons

Kashmir Times. Dated: 11/15/2019 11:51:08 PM

Dear Editor,
Our courts including Supreme Court are prompt in giving stay-orders as a normal practice when at times such stay-orders are even injurious to Justice Delivery System. But when such a stay-order was of utmost importance on the issue of Sabrimala Temple not only considering highly disturbed sentiments of majority Hindu community but also for maintaining law and order problem, Constitution Bench of Supreme Court on 14.11.2019 while referring the matter to a larger seven-member bench did not stay its earlier order. Logically also, Constitution Bench must have found at least some substance in review-petition that the matter was referred to larger seven-member bench. Such a stay-order was otherwise also necessary to maintain dignity of its own order which had posed great difficulty to authorities in implementation. It is significant that even the original verdict was not unanimous with lone woman-judge in that Bench differing from the majority-verdict.
The issue in Sabrimala Temple case is also not of gender-discrimination but is of religious faith which is based on totally Hindu traditions which in turn are completely based on scientific aspects and requirement of traditions. The lone woman judge in the Constitution Bench gave dissent verdict rightly realizing that entry of women in age-group of 10-50 years was banned at Sabrimala Temple because the god worshipped there was a brahmchari and entry of women in marriageable age of 10-50 years must not be allowed. Ritual of prohibiting women during menstruation in kitchens etc was designed due to hygienic and physical weakness of women in these days because of excessive bleeding.
—Subhash Chandra Agrawal,
1775 Kucha Lattushah
Dariba, Chandni Chowk Delhi.