SC adjourns 'Right to Pray' hearings by 3 weeks, lawyers to meet for framing of issues

In the 'Right to pray' hearings which commenced in the Supreme Court on Monday, the nine-judge bench headed by CJI SA Bobde, on Monday adjourned by three weeks to the first week of February, to hear the issues pertaining to discrimination against women in various religions and at religious places including Kerala's Sabarimala Temple. Moreover, the apex court asked 4 senior lawyers to convene a meeting for deciding issues to be taken up by each lawyer - similar to the Ayodhya hearings. The apex body also said that it was not considering review pleas in the Sabarimala case, but only questions of female genital mutilation, entry of Parsi women into the fireplaces and entry of Muslim women in mosques.

SC 9-judge bench commences hearing on pleas on discrimination against women at religious places

SC adjourns hearing to February

During the hearing, senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi requested the court to reframe the seven issues the SC was hearing as it had a broad scope. In response, the CJI said that Secretary-General will coordinate with lawyers on January 17 in reframing or adding issues to be dealt with by it. While arguing in the SC, counsel Rajeev Dhawan stated that he would fight against the Supreme Court’s intervention into matters of religion stating that religion was a fundamental right of each individual.

Earlier on January 9, the Supreme Court set up a 9-judge Constitution Bench which would hear the right to pray matter from January 13 onwards on a day-to-day basis. This development comes nearly two months after a 5-member Constitution Bench comprising former Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices Nariman, Khanwilkar, Chandrachud and Malhotra decided to expand the scope of the Sabarimala review pleas and referred it to a larger bench for adjudication. The nine-judge bench led by the Chief Justice of India SA Bobde comprises of Justices R Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, M M Shantanagoudar, S A Nazeer, R Subhash Reddy, B R Gavai and Surya Kant.

SIGNIFICANT: 9-judge Constitution bench of SC to hear Right to Pray plea from January 13

SC transfers Sabarimala issue to 7-judge bench

On November 14, the Supreme Court had decided by a 3:2 verdict to review its 2018 Sabarimala order, referring it to a 7-judge SC bench. While delivering its verdict, the apex court clubbed the entry of women in mosques and the tower of silence, the legality of female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra community along with the Sabarimala issue. But there will not be a stay on the earlier judgment which allowed the entry of women between the age group of 10 to 50 years into Sabarimala temple.

SC's Sabarimala verdict expands scope, includes issues pertaining to other religions

What is the Sabarimala case? 

On September 28, 2018, the SC lifted the ban on the entry of women belonging to all age groups in the Sabarimala temple. This sparked off huge protests across Kerala. The Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) which manages the shrine, argued that the SC could not interfere with a century-old belief as the ban was based on the deity's celibate identity. While the Kerala government supported the verdict, it has not yet allowed women to enter the shrine.

Sabarimala devotees followed by stray dog for 480 km as they walk from Tirumala to Pamba