Kerala Govt Files Affidavit in Supreme Court, Says Religious Scholars Should Be Consulted on Sabarimala Women’s Entry
New Delhi: The state government of Keralam has filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court regarding women’s entry into Sabarimala. The government presented its position before a nine-judge bench. It stated that a decision on women’s entry should be taken after consulting religious scholars. The affidavit also clarifies that the restriction on women’s entry is not a serious violation of human rights. The government has submitted written responses to the seven questions raised by the Supreme Court.
The affidavit submitted to the court also states that religious practices cannot be challenged by outsiders through public interest litigation. A 17-page affidavit has been submitted. It further suggests that a committee including experts with deep knowledge of religious matters should be formed to make decisions on issues related to traditional practices. A similar recommendation had been made earlier in an affidavit submitted during the government of V. S. Achuthanandan in 2008.
The response arguments were prepared in Delhi by government lawyers following the instructions of Advocate General Gopalakrishna Kurup. Government Standing Counsel Nisharajan Shonkar submitted the arguments before the court. The Advocate General and government lawyers also held discussions with senior advocate Jaideep Gupta, who represented the state government in the Supreme Court.
The SC has formulated seven questions to be answered by the 9-judge bench, which has set April 7, 2026, to commence the hearing.
The 7 questions are:
1. What is the interplay between the freedom of religion under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution with other provisions under Part III of the Constitution?
2. What is the scope of “public order, morality and health” under Article 25(1) of the Constitution?
3. What is the scope and extent of the word ‘morality’ under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India and whether it is meant to include constitutional morality?
4. What is the scope and extent of judicial review with regard to identification of essential religious practices?
5. What is the meaning of expression “Sections of Hindus” occurring in Article 25(2)(b) of the Constitution of India?
6. Whether essential religious practices are protected under Article 26?
7. Whether a person not belonging to a religious denomination or religious group can question a practice of that religious denomination or religious group by filing a PIL?