SC: Temple entry curbs will end up dividing society

excluding people from temples on grounds of caste, belief or denominational identity could have a damaging effect on Hinduism itself, observing that the constitutional endeavour must be to “unify and not create further divisions” within society.

- Utkarsh Anand

The Supreme Court of India

“Keep aside the Sabarimala controversy...everybody must have access to every temple and mutt. But if you say it is a practice...that only my section must attend my temple and no one else, that is not good for Hinduism,” the nine-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant remarked, adding that such an approach would end up “dividing the society further.” The bench also includes justices BV Nagarathna, MM Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, AG Masih, R Mahadevan, Prasanna B Varale and Joymalya Bagchi.

The observations came on the third day of hearing in the Sabarimala reference, as the court examined the interplay between denominational rights under Article 26 and the State's power to enact social reform laws under Article 25(2)(b), particularly in the context of temple entry.

Appearing for the Nair Service Society, senior advocate CS Vaidyanathan argued that the landmark ruling in Sri Venkataramana Devaru Vs State of Mysore (1958), which upheld the application of temple entry laws to denominational temples, was wrongly decided. He contended that Article 26(b), which guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs, operates independently and cannot be curtailed by laws made under Article 25(2)(b).