[ad_1]
Supreme Court of India (file photo)
NEW DELHI: Providing detailed reasons for its February 10 decision to receive petitions seeking review of its verdict on Sabarimala The entrance to the temple, the Supreme Court said Monday, given the confusion over the exercise of the right to religion, was of “utmost importance” to define the scope and scope of this fundamental right.
A bench of five judges by four to a majority had lifted the traditional ban on the entry of women in the age group of 10 to 50 in the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple. In deciding the petitions seeking revision of this ruling, another bank of five judges by a majority of three to two referred the issue of the right to religion to a bank of seven judges saying that the controversy involved not only the entry of women into the temple. of Sabarimala but also to mosques and Parsi women’s right to enter agiyaris and the validity of the custom of female genital mutilation among Dawoodi Bohra community.
However, CJI S A Bobde decided to entrust the issue to a bank of nine judges, a move activists opposed. A bank of CJI Bobde, R Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, M M Shantanagoudar, S Abdul Nazeer, R Subhash Reddy, B R Gavai and Surya Kant it had rejected pleas questioning the power of the SC to refer the issue of the right to religion to a court of nine judges. On Monday, he provided a 29-page explanation for his decision.
Writing the judgment for the bank, Justice Bobde He said: “The reference to questions of law related to the scope of articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution are of utmost importance and require an authorized pronouncement from a larger bank.”
.
[ad_2]
