Freedom of religion cannot be taken away in the name of reforms: Supreme Court on Sabarimala case

The Supreme Court on Monday said that religious freedom cannot be curtailed in the name of social reform. The court said that the framers of the Constitution have made provisions according to the needs of the society, which cannot be changed by a nine-judge bench. A nine-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant is hearing cases related to the entry of women into religious places, including the Sabarimala temple, and the scope of religious freedom. The trial continued for the 14th day on Monday. Justice B V Nagarathna said religious freedom cannot be curtailed in the name of social reform. The court indicated that if the demand for the amendment arises with the consent of the public, it may be considered. The case will be heard again on Wednesday. During the hearing, senior advocate Jaideep Gupta, appearing for the Kerala government, said essential aspects of religion cannot be removed in the name of social reform. He said that the right to worship is important in Hinduism and it takes place in holy places, removing them would be a violation of the right. To this, Justice Nagarathna said that religious freedom cannot be curtailed in the name of social reform. The court argued that if a state makes a law for social welfare, it should not be repealed on the basis of religious practices. Senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, appearing for the Maharashtra Superstition Nirmulan Samiti, said rationalists look at everything on the basis of logic. He said that Article 51A(h) talks about promoting scientific thinking and spirit of reform in the Constitution. Senior advocate Maneka Guruswamy, appearing for Swami Agnivesh, said the Constitution has the potential to amend religions. Referring to Article 26, he said it uses the word "manage" and not "control". It is clear that there is a balance between the rights of religious institutions and personal freedom. Justice Nagarathna said provisions like Article 30 for minorities were made keeping in mind their circumstances. He questioned whether a nine-judge bench could change the system that the framers of the Constitution had thoughtfully decided. Guruswamy replied that the framers of the Constitution were confident that the amendment to religion would not disturb the balance of civilization. Earlier, the Supreme Court had said that if every religious practice is challenged in court, a large number of petitions will come and the structure of religions may be affected. Sabarimala temple case to hear on April 7 The hearing in the Sabarimala temple case began on April 7. During this time, the central government presented arguments against the entry of women into the Sabarimala temple. The government had said that the entry of men into many goddess temples in the country is also banned. Therefore, religious traditions should be respected.