SC warns against court interference in religious practices, citing far-reaching consequences
The Supreme Court observed that entertaining petitions on religious practices could lead to a deluge of similar cases, potentially disrupting India's unique civilisational fabric where religion is deeply intertwined with society. During the Sabarimala review case hearing, Justice B.V. Nagarathna highlighted India's identity as a "civilisation" with a constant link between people and religion, questioning the courts' role in intervening in such matters. Justice M.M. Sundresh echoed concerns about opening floodgates if fundamental rights challenges are allowed against religious beliefs, suggesting it could break down every religion and constitutional court.
Key Points
- The Supreme Court cautioned against judicial intervention in religious practices, fearing a flood of similar petitions.
- Justice B.V. Nagarathna emphasized India's unique civilisational identity, where religion and society are intimately connected.
- The court questioned whether judicial forums are appropriate for examining and intervening in matters of faith.
- Justice M.M. Sundresh warned that challenging religious practices based on fundamental rights could have far-reaching negative consequences for all religions and the judiciary.
Exam Facts
- The observation was made during a nine-judge Bench hearing of the Sabarimala review case.
- Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice M.M. Sundresh made the observations.
- The court discussed the implications of challenging religious practices for violation of fundamental rights.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.