Despite the Supreme Court’s verdict, the temple administration did not allow any woman to enter the shrine since it opened earlier last week.
The Supreme Court Tuesday said it will hear on November 13 the petitions seeking review of its judgment last month that allowed women of all age to enter the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. The temple will open again on November 5 for one day and will reopen on November 16 for a period of twelve days. The hearing will take place before the temple re-opens for the second time.
The petitions have been filed by the National Ayyappa Devotees Association (NADA), a voluntary outfit which was not a party to the original case, and by a devotee Jaya Rajkumar.
Despite the Supreme Court’s verdict, the temple administration did not allow any woman to enter the shrine since it opened earlier last week. Twelve women in the age groups of 10-50 were stopped by protesters from reaching the temple. Besides, journalists were heckled, prohibitory orders were issued and massive protests broke out whenever a woman made her way close to the shrine. The temple opened on October 17 – first time after the apex court verdict – and closed on October 22 after the evening prayers.
One of the women who was stopped by protesters on way to Sabarimala temple on Sunday. (Photo: Vignesh Krishnamoorthy)
The temple administration has written to the government that it would lock the temple and stop rituals if any tradition is broken. The Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) said that it would file a detailed report on the ‘grave situation’ to the Supreme Court.
On September 28, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, in a 4-1 verdict, threw open the doors of the Sabarimala temple to women of all age, ending the entry ban on women of menstruating age. It said the centuries-old custom at the shrine was not an essential religious practice and “the attribute of devotion to divinity cannot be subjected to the rigidity and stereotypes of gender”. Four of the five judges on the bench — then Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud — ruled against the restriction on women while Justice Indu Malhotra gave a dissenting opinion, saying “the religious practice of restricting the entry of women between the ages of 10 to 50 years is in pursuance of an ‘essential religious practice’… notions of rationality cannot be invoked in matters of religion by courts”.