Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
While agreeing to hear next week the petition of a Kerala woman who was allegedly prevented from visiting the Sabarimala temple, the Supreme Court on Thursday said its 2018 verdict allowing entry of women of all ages into the shrine was not the “final word”.
The remark by the SC bench, headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, came when senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for a woman devotee, Bindu Ammini, alleged violation of the 2018 verdict, saying her client was attacked outside the office of the police commissioner during her visit to the Sabarimala shrine.
The apex court said the issue had been referred to a seven-judge bench for consideration. “There is (an order) for a much larger bench to decide the matter. There is no final word as yet,” the bench said.
On November 14, the Supreme Court, in a 3-2 decision, decided that petitions seeking review of the verdict would be kept pending till a larger bench of seven judges took a call on the matter.
The five-judge bench said its September 28, 2018, judgment lifting age restrictions on the entry of women into the Sabarimala hill shrine might impinge on the affairs of other religions too and would require a more detailed examination.
Jaising said Bindu Ammini was attacked just outside the police commissioner’s office, despite the fact that the earlier judgment allowing entry of all girls and women into the temple was not stayed by the November 14 judgment.
“Bindu was attacked with some chemical substance right outside the office of Commissioner of Police,” Jaising said.
“We will list the petition along with earlier petition next week,” the bench said.
In her petition, Bindu said she had decided to visit the shrine on November 26 along with activist Trupti Desai and others, but taxi drivers refused to take them. Thereafter she went to lodge a complaint with police, but “was attacked in front of the office of the Commissioner of Police, Ernakulam District, Kerala”, the petition claimed.
Bindu said “some chemical substances having burning sensation over the body was sprayed at her face” but the “police failed to act in time or to give her adequate protection”.
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram