Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The judgment by Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, which runs upto 165 pages, is the longest among all four judgments delivered in the Sabarimala case.The observation made by Justice Chandrachud that social exclusion of women, based on menstrual status, is a form of untouchability, will have far-reaching consequences.
Justice Chandrachud, like the CJI, holds that devotees of Lord Ayyappa do not satisfy the judicially enunciated requirements to constitute a religious denomination under Article 26 of the Constitution. He has also taken serious note of customs which consider menstruating women as polluting the surroundings. He observed that irrespective of the status of a woman, menstruation has been equated with impurity.The judge further holds that Article 17 not only applies to untouchability practices in relation to lower castes, but it will also apply to the systemic humiliation, exclusion and subjugation faced by women.
While the judgment authored by the Chief Justice do not address the argument based on Article 17 (abolition of untouchability) of the Constitution, Justice Chandrachud widely discusses it vis-à-vis the issue of practice of exclusion based on menstruation constitutes a form of untouchability and is prohibited by Article 17 of the Constitution.Finally, the notifications issued by the Devaswom Board prohibiting the entry of women between the ages of 10 and 50, are held unconstitutional.
86540
103860
630
114
59824