Can non-believers demand entry into temples? Supreme Court raises critical question

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court’s nine-judge Constitution Bench, while deliberating on the scope of religious freedom and gender equality, has raised a pivotal question: Can non-believers legally demand the right to enter a place of worship?

During the hearing of petitions concerning the Sabarimala temple and other religious sites, the Bench emphasised the need to distinguish between genuine devotees and those who do not subscribe to the temple's faith. Justice Nagarathna specifically questioned the legal basis for an individual with no religious affiliation to the deity—citing the example of a non-believer from North India seeking entry into a South Indian temple—to challenge age-old customs. The Court suggested an inquiry into whether such petitions are motivated by external forces rather than genuine faith.

Regarding the legal framework, the Bench observed that the Constitution provides a specific avenue for religious denominations to preserve their unique traditions, noting that respecting such diversity is essential for maintaining national unity. Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, representing petitioners Bindu Ammini and Kanakadurga, argued that preventing a woman from a Scheduled Caste community from entering the temple constitutes a violation of Article 17, which pertains to the abolition of untouchability. While the petitioners contended that the restriction on women aged 10 to 50 is inherently discriminatory, the Court remarked that the exclusion appeared to be based on age and physiological traditions rather than caste-based discrimination.

The hearing continues to explore the delicate balance between individual fundamental rights and the collective right of a religious community to manage its own internal affairs.