Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

    • 25 views

    Moot Problem-2

    Uploaded by

    kola yesamma
    The Sabarimala temple in Kerala bans the entry of women between 10-50 years of age, citing long-standing tradition of the celibate deity. The Indian Young Lawyers Association and women's rights groups have petitioned the Supreme Court challenging this ban as unconstitutional gender discrimination. The temple board argues the restriction is based on devotional celibacy practices. The Supreme Court is questioning the logic and historical accuracy of the ban, which a previous High Court ruling had upheld. This case weighs worshipping rights against religious customs and traditions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Moot Problem-2

    Uploaded by

    kola yesamma
    25 views2 pages
    The Sabarimala temple in Kerala bans the entry of women between 10-50 years of age, citing long-standing tradition of the celibate deity. The Indian Young Lawyers Association and women's rights groups have petitioned the Supreme Court challenging this ban as unconstitutional gender discrimination. The temple board argues the restriction is based on devotional celibacy practices. The Supreme Court is questioning the logic and historical accuracy of the ban, which a previous High Court ruling had upheld. This case weighs worshipping rights against religious customs and traditions.

    Original Title

    MOOT PROBLEM-2

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Sabarimala temple in Kerala bans the entry of women between 10-50 years of age, citing long-standing tradition of the celibate deity. The Indian Young Lawyers Association and women's rights groups have petitioned the Supreme Court challenging this ban as unconstitutional gender discrimination. The temple board argues the restriction is based on devotional celibacy practices. The Supreme Court is questioning the logic and historical accuracy of the ban, which a previous High Court ruling had upheld. This case weighs worshipping rights against religious customs and traditions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    25 views2 pages

    Moot Problem-2

    Uploaded by

    kola yesamma
    The Sabarimala temple in Kerala bans the entry of women between 10-50 years of age, citing long-standing tradition of the celibate deity. The Indian Young Lawyers Association and women's rights groups have petitioned the Supreme Court challenging this ban as unconstitutional gender discrimination. The temple board argues the restriction is based on devotional celibacy practices. The Supreme Court is questioning the logic and historical accuracy of the ban, which a previous High Court ruling had upheld. This case weighs worshipping rights against religious customs and traditions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    MOOT COURT PROBLEM 2

    The Sabarimala temple, located in the Periyar Tiger Reserve in the Western Ghat mountain
    ranges of Pathanamthitta District of Kerala, is renowned for lakhs of pilgrims thronging it all
    through the year. Pilgrims trek the Neelimala to reach the shrine, which has 18 sacred steps,
    to worship Lord Ayyapa after undergoing strict religious vows for 48 days.

    The temple is also prominent for another reason — the selective ban on women entering it.
    Women aged between 10 and 50, that is those who are in menstruating age, are barred from
    entering the temple. While there is no restriction on women to worship Lord Ayyapa in any
    other temple, their entry is prohibited only in this temple alone.

    The Indian Young Lawyers Association and five women lawyers approached the Supreme
    Court seeking a direction to allow entry of women into the temple without age restrictions.
    Another group of women, part of the "Happy to Bleed" campaign, has also sought the court's
    direction on whether society should continue to bear with “menstrual discrimination."

    Their petition contended that discrimination in matters of entry into temples was neither a
    ritual nor a ceremony associated with Hindu religion. Such discrimination was totally anti-
    Hindu. The religious denomination could only restrict entry into the sanctum sanctorum and
    could not ban entry into the temple, making discrimination on the basis of sex.

    The Travancore Devasom Board, which maintains the temple, had replied that the ban was in
    accordance with centuries-old tradition, Lord Ayyapa, being a Naishtika Brahmmachari (one
    who has vowed to remain celibate). Another argument put forth by the temple authorities is
    that it is not possible for women to put up with the physical hardship, austerity and days of
    celibacy like men.

    The on-going trial in the Supreme Court has also put the spotlight on a 1991 Kerala High Court
    judgment, which held that the restriction was in accordance with a usage from time
    immemorial and not discriminatory under the Constitution. Upholding the restrictions, the
    High Court, in its judgment, said: “According to ‘The Sabarimala Thanthri’, these customs and
    usages had to be followed for the welfare of the temple. He said only persons who had
    observed penance and followed the customs are eligible to enter the temple and it is not
    proper for young women to do so."

    Twenty-five years after this judgment, the Supreme Court has questioned the “logic” behind
    the restriction, even wondering whether there was any proof that women did not enter the
    sanctum sanctorum 1,500 years ago.

    Earlier instances

    The Sabarimala Temple tantri would perform a "purification ceremony" at the 18-sacred steps
    that lead to the sanctum sanctorum, whenever the rules are violated. The last ceremony took
    place in December 2011, after a 35-year-old woman managed to climb the "pathinettam
    padi".

    In 2006, astrologer P. Unnikrishna Panicker conducted a "devaprasnam" at the temple and


    'found' that there were signs of a woman having entered the sanctum sanctorum. Soon after
    this, yesteryear Kannada actor Jayamala said she had entered the temple and even touched
    the idol in 1987, when she was shooting for a movie.

    Amidst outrage, the Kerala police filed a report, state the entire episode was "orchestrated
    to gain publicity." The case is pending in the Kerala High Court.

    Though, courts have generally not interfered in the traditions and practices followed in
    religious place, it has never failed to uphold equality whenever discrimination was reported.
    In this conflict of worshipping rights versus customs, all eyes are now on the Supreme Court.

    Prepare memorials/arguments for both Petitioner and Respondent to present them before
    the Moot Court.

    You might also like