If a man can enter, a woman can also: SC
It is routinely said that men and women are equal. They have equal rights but why are the biological processes of women always questioned at some public places, for an instance, holy places as such temples, mosques.
To be precise, women are disallowed entering these places in the age group of 10-50 because of their menstrual cycle. But, a female could undergo the mentrual process as early as 10 years of age and it could last above the age of 50 years also. Basically, it is completely a natural process that is unpredictable. So, how could the they put an age bracket at the particular front? Moreover, if men had the same biological process, who would be praying at all.
A bunch of petitions were filed against the entering of women in the famous Sabarimala temple. Hence, the centuries-old prohibition on women for the same is being challenged. But thanks a ton to the Supreme Court that introspected the matter and put the claims that it is unreasonable to ban women from entering the Sabarimala temple. A bench was set up in SC that comprised of R.F Nariman, A.M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra, which was led by CJI Dipak Misra.
The bench said, “The right to enter a temple is not dependent on a legislation. It is the constitutional right, which is enshrined under article 25 and 26 of the constitution”. CJI questioned that the women are disallowed because they are considered ‘impure’ which amounts to the practice of untouchability, a social evil abolished by the law.
He added that there’s no concept of private mandirs and every body could offer prayers in the same without any religion disparity coming into the picture.
He stated, “When a man can enter, a woman can also go. What applies to a man, applies to a woman also.” Moreover, the members of the bench put forth their views against the ban. Senior advocate Indira Jaising said, the practice of banning women from entering the temple, was violative of various fundamental rights including article 17 which deals with untouchability. She also added that women were discriminated not on the gender basis but because of menstruation and that was demeaning the value of women.
Senior advocate J D gupta said, “The state of Kerala would support women’s entry inside the temple”. To his statement, the bench then referred to the contrary affidavits of the Kerala government which had in 2015 had supported the entry of women but made a U- turn in 2017 and opposed it. The SC expressed its wonder at the frequency with which Kerala changed its stand in the matter and has recently filed an affidavit explaining that it allows women to enter the temple regardless of their menstrual cycle.
The chief minister said that the state is bound to obey SC’s verdict” and the conclusion to the matter has been made by the SC in support of women giving the rights of entering the temple.
( The views expressed are the author’s own.The POST neither endorses nor is responsible for them.)