The Supreme Court has indicated that the concept of 'untouchability' may not be an appropriate ground to test the validity of restrictions on the entry of menstruating women into Kerala's Sabarimala temple.
During the hearing, the nine-judge bench observed that Article 17, which prohibits untouchability, cannot be stretched to cover a practice that operates for a limited period each month.
Justice BV Nagarathna noted that there cannot be 'three days of untouchability every month and on the fourth day no untouchability,' underscoring the difficulty in equating menstrual exclusion with the historically entrenched practice of caste-based untouchability.
The remarks assume significance as the 2018 Sabarimala judgment expanded the scope of Article 17 beyond its traditional caste-based understanding.
The Centre, in its submission, urged the court to uphold the restriction on the entry of women of menstruating age, contending that the issue lies within the domain of religious faith and denominational autonomy.
The nine-judge bench is tasked with answering seven wide-ranging constitutional questions arising from the 2019 reference, including the scope of judicial review over religious practices.
