Top Court Rebukes Plea Citing Kamakhya Temple Practices In Sabarimala Review

The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the nine-judge Constitution bench is not adjudicating on individual temple practices - like animal sacrifice or occultism - as a petitioner objected to tantric practices being practiced at Assam's famous Ma Kamakhya Temple.

An advocate seeking review of the court's Sabarimala Temple verdict argued that occult practices and animal sacrifice there violated fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21.

The advocate pointed out the temple functioned without any denomination. "It has a cleft rock in the shape of a vagina, and it is worshiped. As opposed to Lord Ayappa Temple, menstruation is celebrated here (at the Assam temple) during the 'Ambubachi' festival. Twenty-five lakh visit in that time and only women priests are allowed," she said, but pointing out that women pilgrims were still not allowed.

"... if (large-scale tantrism) is done for good purpose, it has good effect. But if it is done to indoctrinate one's mind, it needs to be stopped, at least in a public place," she submitted.

At this point Chief Justice Surya Kant asked her which side she was arguing for. "... you must decide. Are you against the review of Sabarimala verdict or for it?"

The advocate said she was arguing for a review of the judgement - which allowed entry of menstruating-age women to the temple - and also said she stood against three practices at the Kamakhya temple, which includes occultism and animal sacrifice.

"Who runs the (Kamakhya) temple? Are you representing the Trust?" the Chief Justice asked.

At this point, the court was informed the temple is run by priest and there is no Trust. It was also informed about an impending legal dispute concerning the management of the temple.

When the advocate persisted with her arguments, the Chief Justice rebuked her for bringing in individual practices of temples into questions about the Constitution.

"We are not going on that dispute. we are on Articles 25 and 26," he said

"We very well understand your arguments... you are coming to individual practice of a temple in the name of Article 26 (but) we are not hearing that. Please stop with this animal sacrifice!"

The nine-judge bench today resumed hearing submissions by intervenors around key issues regarding religious freedom (Articles 25/26), judicial review of faith-based customs, and the 2018 Sabarimala verdict.