A 9-judge Supreme Court bench strongly questioned the maintainability of the original 2006 Sabarimala PIL, calling it an abuse of process. This hearing, part of a review of the 2018 judgment, highlights critical judicial scrutiny of PILs and the interplay of Article 25 (right to conscience) with religious practices like temple entry and Parsi fire temple access for intermarried women.
Exam Lens
Quick Exam Facts From News
1-Minute Revision
- ›SC Bench Strength: 9-Judge Bench
- ›2018 Sabarimala Verdict: 4-1 by 5-Judge Bench (CJI Dipak Misra)
- ›Target this Data: 2006 (Year of original Sabarimala PIL)
- ›Target this Nodal Body: Supreme Court of India (9-judge bench)
- ›Target this Legal Point: Article 25(1) - Right to conscience accrues by birth
Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.
Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.