Sabarimala Verdict: Gender Equality vs. Religious Freedom

In Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (2018), the Supreme Court held that the practice of barring women of menstruating age (10–50 years) from entering the Sabarimala temple violated constitutional rights to equality, non-discrimination, and freedom of religion.

The majority judgement emphasised that religious customs cannot override the Constitution. Article 25 protects religious freedom, but it is subject to public order, morality, and health. The Court held that practices rooted in gender discrimination cannot be deemed essential religious practices and thus are not protected under Article 26.

The ruling led to significant public outcry and protests, with many devotees arguing that it interfered with longstanding traditions. A review petition is still pending before a larger constitutional bench to reconsider the balance between religious freedom and gender justice.

At Mullick & Co., we consider this case essential for understanding how courts navigate the complex terrain of rights, traditions, and evolving societal norms. It serves as a critical touchstone in debates about gender equity and religious reform.