CJI questions locus and intent of original Sabarimala PIL, stating it should have been 'thrown in dustbin'
During a hearing on review petitions concerning the 2018 Sabarimala judgment, a nine-judge Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, severely questioned the locus standi and intent of the original petitioner, Indian Young Lawyers Association (IYLA). CJI Kant remarked that the PIL should have been 'thrown outright in the dustbin,' while Justice M.M. Sundresh called it 'a clear abuse of the process of law.' The bench also questioned the practice of barring Parsi women from fire temples if they marry outside the religion, linking it to freedom of conscience under Article 25(1).
Key Points
- The Supreme Court bench questioned the locus standi and intent of the original petitioner in the Sabarimala case.
- CJI Surya Kant stated that the original PIL should have been 'thrown outright in the dustbin.'
- Justice M.M. Sundresh described the filing of the petition as 'a clear abuse of the process of law.'
- The bench also deliberated on the issue of Parsi women being barred from fire temples upon marrying outside their religion.
- The court emphasized that freedom of conscience under Article 25(1) is a birthright and cannot be taken away by marriage.
Exam Facts
- Original Sabarimala judgment: September 28, 2018 (five-judge bench, 4-1 verdict)
- Current hearing: Nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court
- Chief Justice of India: Surya Kant
- Constitutional Article discussed: Article 25(1) (Freedom of conscience)
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.