- The Pandalam royal family urges Kerala govt to act on Sabarimala issues early
- Calls for withdrawal of cases against devotees from protests at Sabarimala
- Demands fresh affidavit be filed in Supreme Court on Sabarimala case
The Pandalam royal family has called on the incoming Kerala government to take early action on Sabarimala-related issues, including withdrawing cases filed against devotees, filing a fresh affidavit in the Supreme Court, and ordering a stronger probe into the alleged loss of temple gold.
Speaking to NDTV, PN Narayana Varma, representative of the Pandalam royal family and state president of the Sabarimala Ayyappa Seva Samaj, said the new government should implement promises made to devotees during the election campaign.
Varma demanded that cases registered against Sabarimala devotees during the protests be withdrawn without delay.
"Devotees have suffered a lot because of these cases. We expect the new government to act soon after assuming office," he said.
He also said the government should file a fresh affidavit in the case pending before the Supreme Court.
According to Varma, both the Ayyappa Seva Samaj and the Pandalam Palace are parties in the ongoing proceedings before the Supreme Court.
On the alleged loss of gold from the temple, Varma demanded a stronger investigation and said not even a single piece of the deity's gold should go missing. He said a central agency probe, including a possible CBI investigation, should be considered.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court's nine-judge Constitution Bench hearing broader constitutional questions linked to the Sabarimala issue has entered its second month.
The bench has been examining questions related to religious practices, denominational rights and the scope of constitutional protections. During the hearings, the Centre argued that the 2018 verdict allowing entry of women of all age groups into Sabarimala was incorrect.
The court has also made several oral observations on the balance between constitutional rights and religious beliefs. However, the bench clarified that it is not directly reviewing the 2018 Sabarimala verdict, but examining larger constitutional questions that could impact multiple religious freedom cases across the country.
