Supreme Court will decide on date for hearing review petitions on Sabarimala verdict tomorrow
The Supreme Court Monday said that it would decide tomorrow as to when the petitions, seeking review of its Sabarimala verdict allowing entry of women of all age groups into the temple, will be listed for hearing.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday said that it would decide tomorrow as to when the petitions, seeking review of its Sabarimala verdict allowing entry of women of all age groups into the temple, will be listed for hearing. A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice SK Kaul considered the submissions of lawyer Mathews J Nedumpara that his petition seeking review of the constitutional bench judgment be listed for urgent hearing. "We know that there are 19 review petitions pending. By tomorrow we will decide," the bench said.
Nedumpara was mentioning the petition filed by National Ayyappa Devotees Association. A five-judge constitution bench by a ratio of 4:1 had held that women of all age groups should be allowed entry inside Kerala's Sabarimala Temple. The court had on 9 October declined an urgent hearing on Nedumpara's plea which had contended that the five-judge Constitution bench verdict lifting the ban was "absolutely untenable and irrational". The bench had said that the review petitions could only be taken up after the Dussehra vacation, adding that in any case, it will be heard in the chamber and not in open court.
The petition filed by Shylaja Vijayan, president, National Ayyappa Devotees Association through Nedumpara, had submitted that, "Faith cannot be judged by scientific or rationale reasons or logic". "The notion that the judgment under review is revolutionary, one which removes the stigma or the concept of dirt or pollution associated with menstruation, is unfounded. It is a judgment welcomed by hypocrites who were aspiring for media headlines. On the merits of the case, as well, the said judgment is absolutely untenable and irrational, if not perverse," the petition had submitted. "Review judgment and order...on the ground that it is unconstitutional and void inasmuch as it is vitiated by errors apparent on the face of the record; that it is without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction, that it is in violation of principles of natural justice and that it is in violation of express constitutional provisions," the plea had said.
Besides the Association, another petition seeking review of the 28 September verdict of the apex court had also been filed by the Nair Service Society (NSS), an organisation for the uplift and welfare of the Nair community. It had said that as the deity is a 'Naistika Brahmachari, females below the age of 10 and after the age of 50 years are eligible to worship him and there is no practice of excluding worship by females. "Hence, the delay or wait for 40 years to worship cannot be considered as exclusionary and it is an error of law on the face of the judgement," the plea had said.
The NSS had said that many essential religious practices will be rendered void and religion itself may be rendered out of existence if the general ground of equality under Article 14 is resorted to and essential religious practices are tested on the principle of rationality.
Pakistan Parliament enacts law to give Kulbhushan Jadhav right to file review appeal against his conviction
Jadhav, a 51-year-old retired Indian Navy officer, was sentenced to death by a Pakistani military court on charges of espionage and terrorism in April 2017
The apex court-appointed three more police officers – SB Shirodkar, Deepinder Singh and Padmaja Chauhan – to the Special Investigation Team.
The oral remarks came in response to the submission of senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the Delhi government, that stubble burning was one of the contributors to air pollution