<p>India's Supreme Court has made the 'right against adverse effects of climate change' a part of the right to life, in an unprecedented leap forward to recognise the impact of climate change on human life in the world's most populous democracy.&nbsp;</p>

<p>While the Supreme Court bench presided by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and composed of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra&nbsp;gave the ruling on March 21, the detailed order was only uploaded over the weekend. The top court was hearing a petition to protect the Great Indian Bustard (GIB) from losing its habitat due to power transmission lines.</p>

<p><strong>Also watch |&nbsp;Climate change endangers wine production worldwide</strong></p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/climate-change-endangers-wine-production-worldwide-706487/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<p>"Article 48A of the Constitution provides that the State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country. Clause (g) of Article 51A stipulates that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures. Although these are not justiciable provisions of the Constitution, they are indications that the Constitution recognises the importance of the natural world,” a three-judge bench presided by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said.&nbsp;</p>

<p><strong>Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/climate-threatened-maldives-receives-tibetan-glacier-water-from-china-705369">Climate change-threatened Maldives receives Tibetan glacier water from China</a></strong></p>

<p>"The importance of the environment, as indicated by these provisions, becomes a right in other parts of the Constitution. Article 21 recognises the right to life and personal liberty while Article 14 indicates that all persons shall have equality before law and the equal protection of laws. These Articles are important sources of the right to a clean environment and the right against the adverse effects of climate change," it said.</p>

<p>"Despite governmental policy and rules and regulations recognising the adverse effects of climate change and seeking to combat it, there is no single or umbrella legislation in India which relates to climate change and the attendant concerns,” the court noted. “However, this does not mean that the people of India do not have a right against the adverse effects of climate change," it added.</p>

<p>On the right of citizenry to a clean environment, the court said: "Without a clean environment which is stable and unimpacted by the vagaries of climate change, the right to life is not fully realised. The right to health (which is a part of the right to life under Article 21) is impacted due to factors such as air pollution, shifts in vector-borne diseases, rising temperatures, droughts, shortages in food supplies due to crop failure, storms and flooding. The inability of underserved communities to adapt to climate change or cope with its effects violates the right to life (Article 21) as well as the right to equality (Article 14)."</p>

<h2><strong>Bid to save Great Indian Bustard's habitat: What is the matter?</strong></h2>

<p>On April 19, 2021, a Supreme Court bench ordered restrictions on the setting-up of overhead transmission lines in an area of about 99,000 square kilometres.</p>

<p>The Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change, Ministry of Power, and Ministry of New and Renewable Energy later sought modification in the top court's directions.&nbsp;</p>

<p>It argued that given New Delhi's international commitments to transition to non-fossil fuels and reduction of emissions, building up the country’s solar and wind energy potential is important. It added that putting high-voltage power lines underground was technically not feasible.</p>

<p>The Supreme Court last week allowed the government's request while recognising technical and land acquisition challenges and prohibitive costs in implementing its April 2021 order.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The court set up a nine-member committee of experts to "assess the feasibility of undergrounding power lines in specific areas, considering factors such as terrain, population density and infrastructure requirements". It also asked the committee "to complete its task and submit a report to this court through the Union Government on or before July 31, 2024".</p>


India's Supreme Court has made the 'right against adverse effects of climate change' a part of the right to life, in an unprecedented leap forward to recognise the impact of climate change on human life in the world's most populous democracy.

India's Supreme Court has made the 'right against adverse effects of climate change' a part of the right to life, in an unprecedented leap forward to recognise the impact of climate change on human life in the world's most populous democracy. While the Supreme Court bench presided by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and composed of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra gave the ruling on March 21, the detailed order was only uploaded over the weekend. The top court was hearing a petition to protect the Great Indian Bustard (GIB) from losing its habitat due to power transmission lines. Also watch | Climate change endangers wine production worldwide × "Article 48A of the Constitution provides that the State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country. Clause (g) of Article 51A stipulates that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures. Although these are not justiciable provisions of the Constitution, they are indications that the Constitution recognises the importance of the natural world,” a three-judge bench presided by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said. Also read | Climate change-threatened Maldives receives Tibetan glacier water from China "The importance of the environment, as indicated by these provisions, becomes a right in other parts of the Constitution. Article 21 recognises the right to life and personal liberty while Article 14 indicates that all persons shall have equality before law and the equal protection of laws. These Articles are important sources of the right to a clean environment and the right against the adverse effects of climate change," it said. "Despite governmental policy and rules and regulations recognising the adverse effects of climate change and seeking to combat it, there is no single or umbrella legislation in India which relates to climate change and the attendant concerns,” the court noted. “However, this does not mean that the people of India do not have a right against the adverse effects of climate change," it added. On the right of citizenry to a clean environment, the court said: "Without a clean environment which is stable and unimpacted by the vagaries of climate change, the right to life is not fully realised. The right to health (which is a part of the right to life under Article 21) is impacted due to factors such as air pollution, shifts in vector-borne diseases, rising temperatures, droughts, shortages in food supplies due to crop failure, storms and flooding. The inability of underserved communities to adapt to climate change or cope with its effects violates the right to life (Article 21) as well as the right to equality (Article 14)." Bid to save Great Indian Bustard's habitat: What is the matter? On April 19, 2021, a Supreme Court bench ordered restrictions on the setting-up of overhead transmission lines in an area of about 99,000 square kilometres. The Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change, Ministry of Power, and Ministry of New and Renewable Energy later sought modification in the top court's directions. It argued that given New Delhi's international commitments to transition to non-fossil fuels and reduction of emissions, building up the country’s solar and wind energy potential is important. It added that putting high-voltage power lines underground was technically not feasible. The Supreme Court last week allowed the government's request while recognising technical and land acquisition challenges and prohibitive costs in implementing its April 2021 order. The court set up a nine-member committee of experts to "assess the feasibility of undergrounding power lines in specific areas, considering factors such as terrain, population density and infrastructure requirements". It also asked the committee "to complete its task and submit a report to this court through the Union Government on or before July 31, 2024".

'Right against adverse effects of climate change part of right to life': India's Supreme Court

<p>In a unique initiative to empower specially-abled people and promote greater inclusivity and accessibility for them,&nbsp;Chief Justice of India, Dr DY Chandrachud, inaugurated the 'Mitti Cafe' within the Supreme Court premises on Friday (Nov 10). The cafe is&nbsp;distinctive as it is fully operated by a team of specially-abled individuals.</p>

<p>The presence of such kind of a cafe also becomes crucial as it serves as a symbol&nbsp;of providing equal opportunities to everyone. One of the most eye-catching moments of the inauguration was the performance of the National Anthem in sign language. Chief Justice Chandrachud, during the ceremony, was quite enthusiastic about this joint venture and said that 'Mitti Cafe' has successfully established 38 cafes nationwide.</p>

<p>Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/watch-huge-amount-of-cash-recovered-in-income-tax-raids-in-indias-rajasthan-657319">Huge amount of cash recovered in income tax raids in India's Rajasthan</a></p>

<p>India, just like all the other nations, was facing an unprecedented time during the COVID-19 crisis that struck the world in early 2020. During the Covid&nbsp;crisis, the cafe played a pivotal role in lending a helping hand in ensuring that people don't go to bed hungry.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Chief Justice&nbsp;Chandrachud said that 'Mitti Cafe'&nbsp;served six million meals during the pandemic. He also urged for support for the venture while noting that all who are managing it are disabled.</p>

<p>Apart from Indian SC Chief Justice, Attorney General R Venkataramani also welcomed the move. He also acknowledged that the one-of-its-kind cafe demonstrates compassion.&nbsp;</p>

<h2><strong>Supreme Court's Committee on Accessibility</strong></h2>

<p>This latest positive step comes at a time when the Supreme Court has already been advocating for increasing accessibility within&nbsp;the premises of the apex court. In 2022, the Supreme Court's Committee on Accessibility laid out recommendations that called for accessibility and breaking barriers for specially-abled individuals.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p>Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-major-national-highways-closed-in-kashmir-valley-due-to-fresh-snowfall-657305">India: Major national highways closed in Kashmir valley due to fresh snowfall</a></p>

<p>The comprehensive audit report also aimed to make the justice system more accessible for persons with disabilities, pregnant women, and senior citizens.&nbsp;</p>

<p><strong>Watch |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/bhutan-king-wangchuck-welcomed-by-assam-cm-himanta-biswa-sarma-654764">Bhutan King Wangchuck welcomed by Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma</a></strong></p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/bhutan-king-wangchuck-welcomed-by-assam-cm-himanta-biswa-sarma-654764/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<p>Some of the suggestions included accessible maps, provision of sign language interpretation, ensuring accessibility to restrooms, setting up of a breastfeeding&nbsp;room, reserved auditorium seating, and a framework to enable the de-identification of HIV-positive persons at the time of legal hearings in a bid to protect&nbsp;their identity, media reports said.&nbsp;</p>

<p><em>(With inputs from agencies)</em></p>


In a unique initiative to empower specially-abled people and promote greater inclusivity and accessibility for them, Chief Justice of India, Dr DY Chandrachud, inaugurated the 'Mitti Cafe' within the Supreme Court premises on Friday (Nov 10).

In a unique initiative to empower specially-abled people and promote greater inclusivity and accessibility for them, Chief Justice of India, Dr DY Chandrachud, inaugurated the 'Mitti Cafe' within the Supreme Court premises on Friday (Nov 10). The cafe is distinctive as it is fully operated by a team of specially-abled individuals. The presence of such kind of a cafe also becomes crucial as it serves as a symbol of providing equal opportunities to everyone. One of the most eye-catching moments of the inauguration was the performance of the National Anthem in sign language. Chief Justice Chandrachud, during the ceremony, was quite enthusiastic about this joint venture and said that 'Mitti Cafe' has successfully established 38 cafes nationwide. Also Read | Huge amount of cash recovered in income tax raids in India's Rajasthan India, just like all the other nations, was facing an unprecedented time during the COVID-19 crisis that struck the world in early 2020. During the Covid crisis, the cafe played a pivotal role in lending a helping hand in ensuring that people don't go to bed hungry. Chief Justice Chandrachud said that 'Mitti Cafe' served six million meals during the pandemic. He also urged for support for the venture while noting that all who are managing it are disabled. Apart from Indian SC Chief Justice, Attorney General R Venkataramani also welcomed the move. He also acknowledged that the one-of-its-kind cafe demonstrates compassion. Supreme Court's Committee on Accessibility This latest positive step comes at a time when the Supreme Court has already been advocating for increasing accessibility within the premises of the apex court. In 2022, the Supreme Court's Committee on Accessibility laid out recommendations that called for accessibility and breaking barriers for specially-abled individuals. Also Read | India: Major national highways closed in Kashmir valley due to fresh snowfall The comprehensive audit report also aimed to make the justice system more accessible for persons with disabilities, pregnant women, and senior citizens. Watch | Bhutan King Wangchuck welcomed by Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma × Some of the suggestions included accessible maps, provision of sign language interpretation, ensuring accessibility to restrooms, setting up of a breastfeeding room, reserved auditorium seating, and a framework to enable the de-identification of HIV-positive persons at the time of legal hearings in a bid to protect their identity, media reports said. (With inputs from agencies)

India: 'Mitti Cafe' with specially-abled staff opens in Supreme Court, elevates inclusivity

<p>Indian Supreme Court on 27 April continued the 6th day of hearing before the Constitution Bench to decide on the legality of same-sex marriages in the country. During the hearing, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud made a profound argument saying that there is no bar in Indian legislation from having any form of ceremony and therefore, the larger question is about legal recognition of the marriage.</p>

<p>"In other words, suppose a same sex couple says that we're inviting a group of 25 friends and we will have a marriage ceremony. In law, there is no prohibition. You also agreed to that. Somebody may have reception, ceremony," CJI Chandrachud said.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The bench comprised Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha.</p>

<p>Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/former-fox-news-host-tucker-carlson-takes-dig-at-us-media-586500">Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson takes dig at US media</a></p>

<p>Upon CJI's argument, Justice Kohli submitted, "What you're saying is that there could be a right to cohabit and give it a name of relationship which is sanctified but that will have no obligations on state to recognise it statutorily."</p>

<p>CJI DY Chandrachud urged Justice Kohli to go step by step on the argument. "Once you recognise that there is a right to cohabit, then it is the obligation of the state that all social impact of cohabitation has legal recognition."&nbsp;</p>

<p>The arguments also centered briefly around the notice provision in marriages in general. For context, the Supreme Court on 20 April said the Special Marriage Act's requirements for a 30-day advance notification of desire to marry were deemed to be deeply patriarchal and to subject vulnerable couples to societal "invasion."</p>

<p>Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/argentina-moves-away-from-us-dollar-for-trade-in-chinese-currency-586465">Argentina moves away from US dollar for trade in Chinese currency</a></p>

<p>"Just that matter about notice provision. That is capable of being handled by any other bench. Issue applies equally to heterosexual &amp; same sex couples," CJI said Thursday.&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;</p>

<p><strong>Watch | Gemini Sankaran, pioneer of Indian Circus dies at age of 99 in Kerala's Kannur</strong></p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gemini-sankaran-pioneer-of-indian-circus-dies-at-age-of-99-in-keralas-kannur-586456/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<h2><strong>Incestuous relationships argument by SG Tushar Mehta&nbsp;</strong></h2>

<p>Solicitor General Tushar Mehta arguing in favour of the Indian government said that if same-sex marriages are provided a legal status petitioners' arguments could one day be raised to defend incestuous relationships.</p>

<p>"Visualise a situation, when a person is attracted to those persons who are mentioned in prohibited relationships. Incest not uncommon in the world and world over it is prohibited...Suppose a person is attracted to his sister, can they say we are consenting adults, we're entering into activities privately and we claim our right of autonomy, choice. Based on that very argument can someone not challenge this definition (of prohibited degrees)? Why this restriction? Who are you to decide with whom?" SG said in the court during the hearing.</p>

<p>Responding over this Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud remarked, "That will be far-fetched." "We used to treat even this as far-fetched," the SG replied.</p>

<p>CJI said, "Sexual orientation or your autonomy as an individual can never be exercised in all aspects of marriage including the entry into marriage, the prohibited relationships, the grounds on which marriage can be dissolved...these are all subject to regulation by law. So these are very far fetched for anybody to even argue before us that orientation is so absolute that I can therefore commit an act of incest. No court will ever countenance this."</p>

<p><strong>WATCH WION LIVE HERE</strong></p>

<p><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1  width=&quot;100%&quot;"></iframe></p>

<p>You can <strong>now write for wionews.com</strong> and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <strong><a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.</strong></p>


Indian Supreme Court on 27 April continued the 6th day of hearing before the Constitution Bench to decide on the legality of same-sex marriages in the country. During the hearing, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud made a profound argument saying that there is no bar in Indian legislation from having any form of ceremony and therefore, the larger question is about legal recognition of the marriage.

Indian Supreme Court on 27 April continued the 6th day of hearing before the Constitution Bench to decide on the legality of same-sex marriages in the country. During the hearing, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud made a profound argument saying that there is no bar in Indian legislation from having any form of ceremony and therefore, the larger question is about legal recognition of the marriage. "In other words, suppose a same sex couple says that we're inviting a group of 25 friends and we will have a marriage ceremony. In law, there is no prohibition. You also agreed to that. Somebody may have reception, ceremony," CJI Chandrachud said. The bench comprised Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha. Also Read | Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson takes dig at US media Upon CJI's argument, Justice Kohli submitted, "What you're saying is that there could be a right to cohabit and give it a name of relationship which is sanctified but that will have no obligations on state to recognise it statutorily." CJI DY Chandrachud urged Justice Kohli to go step by step on the argument. "Once you recognise that there is a right to cohabit, then it is the obligation of the state that all social impact of cohabitation has legal recognition." The arguments also centered briefly around the notice provision in marriages in general. For context, the Supreme Court on 20 April said the Special Marriage Act's requirements for a 30-day advance notification of desire to marry were deemed to be deeply patriarchal and to subject vulnerable couples to societal "invasion." Also Read | Argentina moves away from US dollar for trade in Chinese currency "Just that matter about notice provision. That is capable of being handled by any other bench. Issue applies equally to heterosexual & same sex couples," CJI said Thursday. Watch | Gemini Sankaran, pioneer of Indian Circus dies at age of 99 in Kerala's Kannur × Incestuous relationships argument by SG Tushar Mehta Solicitor General Tushar Mehta arguing in favour of the Indian government said that if same-sex marriages are provided a legal status petitioners' arguments could one day be raised to defend incestuous relationships. "Visualise a situation, when a person is attracted to those persons who are mentioned in prohibited relationships. Incest not uncommon in the world and world over it is prohibited...Suppose a person is attracted to his sister, can they say we are consenting adults, we're entering into activities privately and we claim our right of autonomy, choice. Based on that very argument can someone not challenge this definition (of prohibited degrees)? Why this restriction? Who are you to decide with whom?" SG said in the court during the hearing. Responding over this Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud remarked, "That will be far-fetched." "We used to treat even this as far-fetched," the SG replied. CJI said, "Sexual orientation or your autonomy as an individual can never be exercised in all aspects of marriage including the entry into marriage, the prohibited relationships, the grounds on which marriage can be dissolved...these are all subject to regulation by law. So these are very far fetched for anybody to even argue before us that orientation is so absolute that I can therefore commit an act of incest. No court will ever countenance this." WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

Same-sex marriage in India: CJI Chandrachud says 'no bar in our law to having any form of ceremony'

<p>Chief justice of India(CJI) Ranjan&nbsp;Gogoi has said that independence of the judiciary is not a one-time pill but "state of affairs" that has to remain constant. He was speaking at the 14th SCO conference of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/all-you-need-to-know-about-shanghai-cooperation-organisation-227166">chief justices in Sochi, Russia</a>.&nbsp;</p>

<p>While emphasising on the dire need to develop and nurture leadership in the judiciary, the CJI said that every nation should aspire for an independent judicial system and independence is the "very soul" of a functioning judiciary.</p>

<p>He explained countries that support and invest in a strong judicial infrastructure are more likely to become nations with stable governments and administrations.&nbsp;</p>

<p>On India experience, he said, executive and judiciary enjoy healthy relationship of mutual respect.</p>

<p>Other Indian Supreme court judges who participated in the meet were Justice V.N.Ramana, Justice D.Y.Chandrachud and Justice M.R.Shah.&nbsp;</p>

<p>On Monday, CJI Gogoi met Russian chief justice Vyacheslav Lebedev during which he said he would look forward to learn from other SCO member states on fast disposal of cases.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He said, the Indian judicial system can absorb practices such as mediation, out of court settlement to resolve pendency of cases, which Indian courts have highest among the world.</p>

<p>The SCO Supreme court judges conference ended with a declaration for further promotion of cooperation among judicial bodies of SCO countries.</p>


Chief justice of India(CJI) Ranjan Gogoi has said that independence of the judiciary is not a one-time pill but "state of affairs" that has to remain constant. He was speaking at the 14th SCO conference of chief justices in Sochi, Russia.

Chief justice of India(CJI) Ranjan Gogoi has said that independence of the judiciary is not a one-time pill but "state of affairs" that has to remain constant. He was speaking at the 14th SCO conference of chief justices in Sochi, Russia. While emphasising on the dire need to develop and nurture leadership in the judiciary, the CJI said that every nation should aspire for an independent judicial system and independence is the "very soul" of a functioning judiciary. He explained countries that support and invest in a strong judicial infrastructure are more likely to become nations with stable governments and administrations. On India experience, he said, executive and judiciary enjoy healthy relationship of mutual respect. Other Indian Supreme court judges who participated in the meet were Justice V.N.Ramana, Justice D.Y.Chandrachud and Justice M.R.Shah. On Monday, CJI Gogoi met Russian chief justice Vyacheslav Lebedev during which he said he would look forward to learn from other SCO member states on fast disposal of cases. He said, the Indian judicial system can absorb practices such as mediation, out of court settlement to resolve pendency of cases, which Indian courts have highest among the world. The SCO Supreme court judges conference ended with a declaration for further promotion of cooperation among judicial bodies of SCO countries.

Independence of judiciary not a one-time pill, says CJI Gogoi at SCO conference

<p>The lone dissenting voice<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/sabarimala-head-priest-disappointed-after-supreme-court-allows-entry-women-168114"> in the verdict on the entry of women</a> in Sabarimala temple, Justice Indu Malhotra said that "issues which have deep religious connotation should not be tinkered with to maintain the secular atmosphere in the country."</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-lifts-ban-womens-entry-sabarimala-temple-kerala-168108">Also Read:&nbsp;Supreme Court lifts </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-lifts-ban-womens-entry-sabarimala-temple-kerala-168108">ban</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-lifts-ban-womens-entry-sabarimala-temple-kerala-168108"> on women's entry to Sabarimala temple in Kerala</a></p>

<p>India's top court allowed women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala shrine in Kerala which was previously denied to women aged between 10 to 50 years.</p>

<p>Disagreeing with the other judges,&nbsp;Justice Indu Malhotra said: "It is not for courts to determine which religious practices are to be struck down except in issues of social evil like 'Sati'."&nbsp;</p>

<p>Justice Malhotra said that Lord Ayyappa devotees form separate religious denomination worthy of protection.&nbsp;</p>

<p>"It is not for the court to interfere in religious practices even if it appears discriminatory, Malhotra said, while adding that right to "equality conflicts with the&nbsp;right to worship of devotees of Lord Ayyappa."</p>

<p>"Issue in this case not limited to Sabarimala only. It'll have far-reaching implications for other places of worships,"&nbsp;Indu Malhotra observed.</p>

<p>"India has diverse religious practices and constitutional morality would allow anyone to profess a religion they believe, she said, while asserting that notions of "rationality cannot be brought into matters of religion".</p>

<p>"Equality doctrine cannot override fundamental right to worship under Article 25," Indu Malhotra said while delivering&nbsp;the verdict on the case.</p>

<p>The verdict which was carried with a 4-1 ratio with Malhotra being the only judge disagreeing with the Supreme Court Bench. Justice R F Nariman and D Y Chandrachud concurred with the CJI.</p>

<p>Apart from Indu Malhotra, the Bench comprised of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justices RF Nariman, AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud.</p>

<p>Chief Justice of India(CJI) Dipak Misra while delivering the verdict had said women cannot be treated as weaker or lesser while adding that "patriarchal notion cannot be allowed to trump equality in devotion."</p>

<p>Justice Chandrachud said the exclusion of women because she menstruates is "utterly unconstitutional".</p>

<p>"Religion cannot be used as cover to deny rights of worship to women. It is also against human dignity," Justice Chnadrachud said.</p>

<p>&nbsp;"Any custom or religious practice if violates the dignity of women by denying them entry due to her physiology is unconstitutional," Chandrachud added.</p>


The lone dissenting voice in the verdict on the entry of women in Sabarimala temple, Justice Indu Malhotra said that "issues which have deep religious connotation should not be tinkered with to maintain the secular atmosphere in the country.

The lone dissenting voice in the verdict on the entry of women in Sabarimala temple, Justice Indu Malhotra said that "issues which have deep religious connotation should not be tinkered with to maintain the secular atmosphere in the country." Also Read: Supreme Court lifts ban on women's entry to Sabarimala temple in Kerala India's top court allowed women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala shrine in Kerala which was previously denied to women aged between 10 to 50 years. Disagreeing with the other judges, Justice Indu Malhotra said: "It is not for courts to determine which religious practices are to be struck down except in issues of social evil like 'Sati'." Justice Malhotra said that Lord Ayyappa devotees form separate religious denomination worthy of protection. "It is not for the court to interfere in religious practices even if it appears discriminatory, Malhotra said, while adding that right to "equality conflicts with the right to worship of devotees of Lord Ayyappa." "Issue in this case not limited to Sabarimala only. It'll have far-reaching implications for other places of worships," Indu Malhotra observed. "India has diverse religious practices and constitutional morality would allow anyone to profess a religion they believe, she said, while asserting that notions of "rationality cannot be brought into matters of religion". "Equality doctrine cannot override fundamental right to worship under Article 25," Indu Malhotra said while delivering the verdict on the case. The verdict which was carried with a 4-1 ratio with Malhotra being the only judge disagreeing with the Supreme Court Bench. Justice R F Nariman and D Y Chandrachud concurred with the CJI. Apart from Indu Malhotra, the Bench comprised of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justices RF Nariman, AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud. Chief Justice of India(CJI) Dipak Misra while delivering the verdict had said women cannot be treated as weaker or lesser while adding that "patriarchal notion cannot be allowed to trump equality in devotion." Justice Chandrachud said the exclusion of women because she menstruates is "utterly unconstitutional". "Religion cannot be used as cover to deny rights of worship to women. It is also against human dignity," Justice Chnadrachud said. "Any custom or religious practice if violates the dignity of women by denying them entry due to her physiology is unconstitutional," Chandrachud added.

Entry of women in Sabarimala temple: Justice Indu Malhotra lone dissenter in Supreme Court bench

chandrachud

Chandrachud., News on Chandrachud., stories on Chandrachud., articles on Chandrachud., Chandrachud. stories at Wion, Chandrachud. news, Chandrachud. latest news