Sabarimala Women’s Entry Case: SC Verdict Likely Soon; Justice B.V. Nagarathna Begins Writing Judgment
NEW DELHI: Justice B.V. Nagarathna has reportedly begun writing her judgment in the Sabarimala women’s entry case, according to media reports. She is the first judge of the nine-member Constitution Bench reported to have begun writing the judgment.
Justice B.V. Nagarathna was the only woman judge on the nine-member Bench that heard arguments for 16 days in the reference concerning the entry of women into the Sabarimala Sree Ayyappa Swamy Temple. The Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, reserved its judgment on May 14, 2026.
The case is being considered by a nine-member Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court. Senior advocate Jaideep Gupta appeared for the Kerala government. The state government's submissions are significant on issues including the extent to which courts can intervene in religious practices, as well as questions relating to gender equality.
In its written submissions, the state has currently taken a position that does not expressly support or oppose the entry of women into Sabarimala. The state has argued on the limitations of judicial intervention in religious practices.
During the proceedings, Chief Justice Surya Kant observed that courts could not be completely denied the authority to examine religious practices. Justice B.V. Nagarathna, meanwhile, observed that a believer would not question the rationality of a religious practice.
Justice Nagarathna further observed that a believer follows a religious practice based on faith rather than by examining its rationality. She also questioned whether a non-believer could question the rationality of such a practice.
Senior advocate V. Giri, appearing for the Kerala government, argued that society in Kerala has recognised the Sabarimala practice as an integral part of the religion.
Senior advocate Sai Deepak, appearing for the Pandalam Palace, argued that courts should not interfere with religious practices.
For now, there is no indication of Justice Nagarathna’s view on the issues before the Bench, or whether the judgment she is writing will form part of the majority opinion or be a separate view. Other judges on the nine-member Bench are also free to write separate opinions.
The date for pronouncing the judgment has not been fixed. The verdict will have to be delivered before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant retires on February 9, 2027.
The present reference originates from the Supreme Court’s September 2018 Sabarimala judgment. A five-judge Constitution Bench, by a 4:1 majority, allowed women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple and held that the exclusion of women between the ages of 10 and 50 could not withstand constitutional scrutiny. Justice Indu Malhotra was the lone dissenting judge.
The subsequent proceedings raised broader constitutional questions concerning religious freedom, judicial review of religious practices, the rights of religious denominations and the scope of the “essential religious practices” doctrine.