The Union government on Thursday, April 9, defended the restriction on the entry of women of menstruating age into the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, as it also listed the temples where men are barred. It also mentioned the Supreme Court's 2018 judgement, that had lifted the ban on entry of women, was based on the assumption that men are superior and women are on a “lower pedestal”.

The Centre had appeared before the nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court which was hearing petitions related to the discrimination women suffer at religious places such as Sabarimala temple. The hearing was chaired by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant.

The other judges who attended the hearing were Justices B V Nagarathna, M M Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Augustine George Masih, Prasanna B Varale, R Mahadevan and Joymalya Bagchi.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, told the Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant that he filed a written submission and gave instances where men are not allowed in temples. He emphasised that the question was not of “male-centric or female-centric” religious beliefs, he said the current case happens to be “woman-centric”.

The Solicitor General said, “It is a Devi Bhagwati temple, there are certain faiths and beliefs attached. There is one temple in Kerala, I read it, where men will go dressed as women. They go to beauty parlour and female family members help them dress in sarees."

Also Read | Sabarimala Temple gold theft: Unnikrishnan Potti secures bail in second case

He told the Bench: “So it is not a question of male-centric or female-centric religious beliefs. In the present case, it happens to be woman-centric.”

For context: At the Kottankulangara Sree Devi Temple in Kerala, men don women's attire every year during the Chamayavilakku festival, paying homage to to the goddess in a ritual rooted in centuries-old tradition.

Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj during the hearing said that it is public morality which is the governing standard, and not the constitutional morality as interpreted earlier.

The September 2018 ruling A five-judge Constitution bench during a hearing in September 2018 lifted the ban on women's entry into the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple in Kerala.

While four were on favour of lifting the ban, one judge dissented, upholding the restriction. The bench ruled that the centuries-old Hindu religious practice was illegal and unconstitutional.

Also Read | Sabarimala women’s entry flashpoint resurfaces as polls near in Kerala

Later, on November 14, 2019, another five-judge bench headed by the then CJI Ranjan Gogoi, by a majority of 3:2, referred the issue of discrimination against women at various places of worship to a larger bench.

The bench had then framed broad issues on freedom across religions, saying they cannot be decided without any facts of the particular case.