Nation Current Affairs 15 Nov 2019 No protection to wom ...

No protection to women devotee visitng Sabarimala Temple: Kerala govt

ANI
Published Nov 15, 2019, 6:56 pm IST
Updated Nov 15, 2019, 7:32 pm IST
The top court also observed that the right to worship by an individual cannot outweigh the rights of a religious group.
While Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices A M Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra sent the review petitions to a larger bench, Justices Nariman and Chandrachud authored a dissenting judgment. (Photo: File)
 While Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices A M Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra sent the review petitions to a larger bench, Justices Nariman and Chandrachud authored a dissenting judgment. (Photo: File)

Thiruvananthapuram: Ahead of the opening of the Sabarimala Temple, Kerala Devaswom Board Minister K Surendran on Friday said the state government will not provide protection to any woman visiting the temple and those who need protection should get an order from the Supreme Court.

He also asserted that activists like Trupti Desai should not see the shrine as a place to show their strength.

 

Read :'A mere rehash of arguments': Dissenting judges on Sabarimala review petitions

"The state government will not provide protection to any woman visiting Sabarimala temple. Activists like Trupti Desai should not see Sabarimala as a place to show their strength. If she needs police protection, she should get an order from the Supreme Court," he told reporters at a press conference here.

The minister's remarks came after a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court had on November 14 referred a clutch of petitions seeking review of its order which paved the way for the entry of women into Sabarimala temple in Kerala to a larger seven-judge bench by a majority 3:2 ruling.

The top court also observed that the right to worship by an individual cannot outweigh the rights of a religious group.

While Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices A M Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra sent the review petitions to a larger bench, Justices Nariman and Chandrachud authored a dissenting judgment.

The review petitions challenged the authority of the apex court to intervene in the belief of the people. It argued that the temple deity is a "Brahmachari" (celibate) and "centuries-old beliefs" should not be disturbed by the entry of menstruating women worshippers.

 

Catch the latest news, live coverage and in-depth analyses from India and World. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

...




ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT