NEW DELHI: Lawyer Sai Deepak, arguing for People of Dharma, told the judges the public character of an institution does not take away its identity. “Ayyappa devotees themselves form a ‘religious denomination’ and their rights must be protected,” he said, adding that the exclusion of a certain category of women does not mean discrimination.
He also told the judges there is no connection whatsoever to the impurity of menstruation forming the basis of the religious practice. This led Justice D Y Chandrachud to observe, “It’s constitutionally impermissible to exclude a section of women on the basis of their physiological conditions. However, essential that practice is, it can’t alter basic constitutional principles. If our Constitution overrides all other aspects, there can’t be the exclusion of women from temples.”
Deepak said, “The deity has the right to remain a ‘Naishtika Brahmachari’ (eternal celibate) and this was also part of the right to privacy of the deity, the lawyer said, adding that the will of the deity needed to be respected. The women have been respecting the tradition for a long time now and this is not a case of temple versus women or men versus women.”
Senior advocate K Radhakrishnan, appearing for the Pandalam royal family, referred to the concept of morality and said the constitutional morality cannot override the private morality in cases of religious practices. The arguments remained inconclusive and will continue on Tuesday.