Kerala High Court refuses to permit 10-year-old girl to visit Sabarimala temple

The Kerala High Court recently refused to permit a 10-year-old girl to enter the Sabarimala temple. .Entry to the famous temple is traditionally barred to women between the ages of 10 and 50 years. This is generally known to be a means of curtailing the entry of women and girls of menstruating age.In 2018, the Supreme Court had held that women of all ages ought to be allowed to enter the temple. However, a review petition challenging this verdict is pending before a larger bench of the top court. As such, the earlier age bar applies at present..A division bench of Justices Anil K Narendran and Harisankar V Menon this week dismissed the 10-year-old girl's plea to enter the temple on taking note of the pending review petition."Since the question regarding the interplay between freedom of religion under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India and the provisions in Part III, particularly Article 14, and connected issues are pending before a larger Bench of the Supreme Court in Kantaru Rajeevaru v. Indian Young Lawyers Association in the review petitions arising out of the judgment of the Constitution Bench in Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, the petitioner cannot invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the aforesaid reliefs," the judgment stated. .The petition was filed by the minor girl after her online application to visit Sabarimala was rejected by the Travancore Devaswom Board which is responsible for the administration of the temple. Her primary contention was that the 10-year age limit was only fixed for the sake of convenience to keep out girls who have hit puberty. She argued that since she herself has not attained puberty, she is entitled to participate in the pilgrimage to Sabarimala. .However, the Court noted that in its earlier judgment in S. Mahendran v. Secretary, Travancore Devaswom Board & Ors., it had held that the age restriction is in accordance with the usage prevalent from time immemorial and that it is not violative of the provisions of the Hindu Place of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Act, 1965 or Articles 15, 25, and 26 of the Constitution. Since any questions regarding the interplay between freedom of religion under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India and the provisions in Part III, particularly Article 14, have to now be decided by the larger bench of the Supreme Court, the High Court deemed it appropriate to dismiss the girl's petition. .The minor girl was represented by advocates Manu Goving and A Jayasankar. The Travancore Devaswom Board was represented by advocate G Biju..[Read Judgment]