📚 Part of: Kerala Geography And Environmental Activism Mcqs

Which case is popularly known as the 'Sabrimala case'?

Category: Kerala Gk

Correct Answer: A) Indian Young Lawyers association v. State of Kerala.

Exam Relevance: UPSC Civil Services, Kerala PSC, Law Entrance Exams

Difficulty: Moderate

Concept notes:

The Sabrimala case, officially known as Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, is a landmark legal case in India that challenged the ban on the entry of women of menstruating age into the Sabrimala Temple. The case was decided by the Supreme Court of India, which ruled in favor of allowing women of all ages to enter the temple.

Common Mistakes:
  • Confusing the Sabrimala case with other landmark cases involving gender equality.
  • Misunderstanding the specific legal challenge and the court's decision.
  • Overlooking the broader implications of the case on religious practices and constitutional rights.
Explanation:

The Sabrimala case, officially known as Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, is a landmark legal case in India that challenged the ban on the entry of women of menstruating age (between 10 and 50 years) into the Sabrimala Temple, a major Hindu pilgrimage site in Kerala. The case was brought to the Supreme Court of India by the Indian Young Lawyers Association, which argued that the ban was discriminatory and violated the constitutional rights of women.

The Sabrimala Temple, dedicated to Lord Ayyappa, has historically barred women of menstruating age from entering the temple premises. The ban was based on the belief that Lord Ayyappa was a 'Naishtika Brahmachari' (eternal celibate) and that the presence of women of menstruating age would disturb the sanctity of the temple. However, the petitioners argued that this practice was discriminatory and violated the fundamental rights of women under Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantee equality before the law, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth, and protection of life and personal liberty, respectively.

In a landmark judgment delivered on September 28, 2018, the Supreme Court of India ruled in favor of the petitioners, declaring that the ban on the entry of women into the Sabrimala Temple was unconstitutional. The court held that the ban was discriminatory and violated the fundamental rights of women. The judgment emphasized that religious practices cannot be used to perpetuate gender discrimination and that the right to equality and non-discrimination is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution.

The Sabrimala case has significant implications for religious practices and constitutional rights in India. It highlights the tension between religious practices and constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination. The case has sparked debates on the role of the judiciary in regulating religious practices and the extent to which religious practices can be challenged on the grounds of constitutional rights.

In conclusion, the Sabrimala case is a crucial legal case that challenges the discriminatory practices in religious institutions and emphasizes the importance of constitutional rights and equality. The case is officially known as Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, and it is a landmark judgment that has far-reaching implications for religious practices and gender equality in India.

Option Analysis:
  • Option A: This option is correct. The Sabrimala case is officially known as Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala. The case challenged the ban on the entry of women of menstruating age into the Sabrimala Temple, and the Supreme Court of India ruled in favor of allowing women of all ages to enter the temple. This case is significant for its implications on religious practices and constitutional rights.
  • Option B: This option is incorrect. Common Cause v. Union of India is a different case that deals with the right to privacy and the Aadhaar card system. It is not related to the Sabrimala case, which specifically concerns the entry of women into the Sabrimala Temple.
  • Option C: This option is incorrect. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India is a landmark case that decriminalized homosexuality in India. It is unrelated to the Sabrimala case, which focuses on the entry of women into the Sabrimala Temple.
  • Option D: This option is incorrect. While it mentions the Indian Young Lawyers Association, it incorrectly identifies the opposing party as the Union of India instead of the State of Kerala. The Sabrimala case specifically involves the State of Kerala, as the temple is located within its jurisdiction.
⬅️ Back to Kerala Geography And Environmental Activism Mcqs – Practice all questions