The Supreme Court's nine-judge Bench is hearing review petitions on the Sabarimala case, a landmark test for India's religious freedom jurisprudence. The core legal debate is whether the 'essential religious practice' test should be replaced by Justice Chandrachud's proposed 'anti-exclusion test', which prioritizes individual dignity over religious customs that cause systematic exclusion. The outcome will set a precedent for cases involving Dawoodi Bohra excommunication and Parsi women's rights.
Exam Lens
Quick Exam Facts From News
1-Minute Revision
- ›Original Sabarimala Case: Indian Young Lawyers Association vs State of Kerala (2018)
- ›Original Majority: 4:1 (CJI Dipak Misra, Justices Khanwilkar, Nariman, Chandrachud vs Justice Indu Malhotra)
- ›Target this Legal Point: Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965.
- ›Target this Data: Original Sabarimala verdict was 4:1 (CJI Dipak Misra, Justices Khanwilkar, Nariman, Chandrachud vs Justice Indu Malhotra).
- ›Target this Case Law: Indian Young Lawyers Association vs State of Kerala (2018).
Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.
Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.