{"id":87036,"date":"2019-11-27T12:08:04","date_gmt":"2019-11-27T12:08:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/?p=87036"},"modified":"2019-11-30T11:15:21","modified_gmt":"2019-11-30T11:15:21","slug":"national","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/national\/","title":{"rendered":"Sabrimala verdict"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<strong>Question: Consider the following statements regarding Sabrimala verdict:<\/strong>\n<br>(1)\tThe Supreme Court referred the Sabarimala case to a larger bench consisting of 9 judges.\n<br>(2)\tWorshipping deity in Sabrimala is Lord Ayyappa.\n<strong><br>Choose the correct of the above:<\/strong>\n<br>(a)\tOnly 1\n<br>(b)\tOnly 2\n<br>(c)\tBoth 1 and 2\n<br>(d)\tNone of  the above\n<strong><br>Answer: b\n<br>Related facts: <\/strong>\n\n\n\n<ul><li>The Supreme Court referred the\nSabrimala case to a larger bench consisting of 7 judges on 14<sup>th<\/sup>\nNovember, 2019.<\/li><li>The Supreme Court referred\npetitions seeking a review of its 2018 decision to allow the entry of women of\nall ages in Kerala\u2019s Sabrimala temple&nbsp;to a larger seven-judge bench.<\/li><li>In a majority verdict of 3:2,\nJustices R F Nariman and D Y Chandrachud gave a dissenting view by dismissing\nall the review pleas and directing compliance of its last year order.<\/li><li>The majority verdict \u2014 written by\nChief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, Justice A M Khanwilkar and Justice Indu\nMelhotra&nbsp;\u2014 said the ban on women\u2019s entry in religious places is not\nrestricted to Sabrimala&nbsp;alone but was part of a larger debate that also\nincludes other religions.<\/li>\n<script async=\"\" src=\"\/\/pagead2.googlesyndication.com\/pagead\/js\/adsbygoogle.js\"><\/script>\n<ins class=\"adsbygoogle\" style=\"display:block; text-align:center;\" data-ad-layout=\"in-article\" data-ad-format=\"fluid\" data-ad-client=\"ca-pub-7086827700842303\" data-ad-slot=\"2662621974\"><\/ins>\n<script>\n     (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});\n<\/script>\n<li>Reading out some portions of the\nmajority view, Chief Justice Gogoi said the petitioners were endeavouring to\nrevive the debate on religion and faith.<\/li><li>He added that the apex court should\nevolve a common policy on religious places like Sabarimala and added that the\nlarger bench will decide the issues relating to Sabarimala, entry of women into\nmosques and practice of female genital mutilation.<\/li><li>Stating that pleas relating to\nSabarimala, entry of women into mosque and practice of genital mutilation&nbsp;in\nthe Bohra community may require adjudication by a larger bench, the court\ndecided to keep pending the pleas seeking a review of its 2018 order.<\/li><li>However, the majority verdict did\nnot say anything adverse against the apex court\u2019s September 28, 2018 decision\nallowing women to enter the shrine nor did it stay the earlier judgment. <\/li><li>The verdict comes just days before\nthe Sabarimala temple opens for the annual \u2018<strong>Mandalam-Makaravilakku\u2019<\/strong> festival. <\/li><li>In 2018, a five-judge Constitution\nBench headed by then CJI Deepak Misra had ruled that banning entry of\nmenstruating women is discriminatory and violates the right to equality. <\/li><li>It said discrimination based on\nmenstruation is akin to practicing untouchability as both concepts are rooted\nin the idea of purity. Justice Melhotra, however, had given a dissenting\nverdict.<\/li><li>The split decision came on 65\npetitions \u2014 56 review petitions, four fresh writ petitions and five transfer\npleas \u2014 which were filed after the apex court verdict of September 28, 2018\nsparked violent protests in Kerala.&nbsp;Temple custodians argue that women of\nmenstrual age are prohibited from offering prayers as the deity there, Ayyappa,\nis a celibate.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Links: <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a rel=\"noreferrer noopener\" aria-label=\" (opens in a new tab)\" href=\"https:\/\/www.thehindu.com\/opinion\/editorial\/review-and-reference-on-sabarimala-review-pleas\/article29975105.ece\" target=\"_blank\">https:\/\/www.thehindu.com\/opinion\/editorial\/review-and-reference-on-sabarimala-review-pleas\/article29975105.ece<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a rel=\"noreferrer noopener\" aria-label=\" (opens in a new tab)\" href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/india\/kerala\/sabarimala-temple-verdict-protests-supreme-court-6119102\/\" target=\"_blank\">https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/india\/kerala\/sabarimala-temple-verdict-protests-supreme-court-6119102\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Question: Consider the following statements regarding Sabrimala verdict: (1) The Supreme Court referred the Sabarimala case to a larger bench consisting of 9 judges. (2) Worshipping deity in Sabrimala is Lord Ayyappa. Choose the correct of the above: (a) Only 1 (b) Only 2 (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) None of the above Answer: [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":87037,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1121],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-87036","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-nnews"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87036","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=87036"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87036\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/87037"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=87036"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=87036"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.edristi.in\/hi\/%e0%a4%b9%e0%a5%8b%e0%a4%ae\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=87036"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}