Supreme Court It was tentatively agreed on Thursday that the right of believers to decide how and how they worship God is not justiciable.
The SC’s remarks followed senior advocate J Muth Raj’s contention that in Hinduism, where every village has a ‘gram devta’, every family has a ‘kul devta’ and ‘ishta devta’, all worshiped differently, it was impossible for the court to scrutinize the need for such a practice while tracing it back to the umbrella religion.
Personal conscience and beliefs: SC
The bench hearing the Sabarimala case included CJI Surya Kant and justices BV Nagarathna, MM Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanulla, Aravind Kumar, AG Masih, PB Varale, R Mahadevan and J Bagchi. CJI Kant and Justices Nagarathna, Sundresh, Kumar and Mahadevan seemed to agree by their observations that it would be difficult for the courts to examine the validity of the manner and manner in which a devotee chooses to worship God through a judicial lens. Since no religious text regulates such worship, what’s the bottom line for judicial review, Raj asked. CJI and Justice Nagarathna said conscience and beliefs are private matters of an individual.Justice Sundresh said, “Right Article 25 protects believers from non-believers. It values one’s conscience in practicing, preaching and propagating religion. The manner of worship is part of the conscience and is the private space of the believer and God. This cannot be given a restrictive meaning.” Justice Mahadevan added, “Belief is belief. Its validity cannot be tested.”All major religious groups, represented by senior advocates NK Kaul, K Radhakrishnan, Krishnan Venugopal, Guru Krishna Kumar, Shyam Divan and Arvind Datar, agreed that the long-standing customs in the Sabarimala temple were faith-based and non-justiciable.