ANALYSING THE SABRIMALA JUDGMENT BY JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD

Authors

  • Shivanshi Gupta 2nd year B. COM LLB Student, Institute of Law, Nirma University Author

Downloads

Abstract

On 28th September 2018 Supreme Court of India pronounced a historic judgment of Indian Young Lawyers Association vs. State of Keralai. It lifted the ban of entry of women aging 1050 years in Sabrimala   temple and held it unconstitutional. With progressive decision of the court by protecting women’s right of equality and right to worship, it has also faced backlash from various sects of people as Supreme Court failed to consider the ‘faith’ of people associated with the tradition which they have been following for hundreds of year. 

The judgment has spurred a clash between the fundamental right of equality and worship with the tradition of people having faith in such a custom since times immemorial. The present case comment would deal with the judgment pronounced by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud only, among the other four judges of the case.  

The judgment by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud was among the majority view of the bench. He said that ban on entry of women should be unconstitutional as it was against the constitutional morality. The exclusion of women from temple does not constitute as the essential religious practice and thus it should be struck down. He also said that menstruation cannot be a valid reason for exclusion and doing such is a form of untouchability violating article 17 and also hampers the dignity of women. 

Published

30-04-2020

License

Copyright © 2026 by Shivanshi Gupta

The copyright and license terms mentioned on this page take precedence over any other license terms mentioned on the article full text PDF or any other material associated with the article.

How to Cite

Shivanshi Gupta. “ANALYSING THE SABRIMALA JUDGMENT BY JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD ”. Journal of Legal Studies & Research, vol. 6, no. 2, Apr. 2020, pp. 301-8, https://journal.thelawbrigade.com/jlsr/article/view/1850.