The Untouchability Debate: Gender and Religious Freedom in India

The Supreme Court of India discusses gender discrimination in religious practices, focusing on the Sabarimala temple's restriction against women aged 10-50. Justice BV Nagarathna questions the concept of untouchability linked to menstruation, while Solicitor General Tushar Mehta objects to associating the practice with Article 17. The hearing examines religious freedom scopes.

The Supreme Court of India heard arguments on gender discrimination in religious practices, particularly focusing on the Sabarimala temple's restrictions against women in the age group of 10 to 50. Justice BV Nagarathna expressed concerns over the perceived discrimination, highlighting the paradox of treating women as 'untouchable' during menstruation and free of such stigma thereafter.

The solicitor general, Tushar Mehta, objected to linking the temple's restrictions to Article 17 of the Constitution, stating that the exclusion was not related to menstruation but an age-specific custom. Justice DY Chandrachud had previously deemed this practice a form of 'untouchability' that perpetuates patriarchy.

This case underscores a broader debate on the balance between religious freedom and gender equality in India. The outcome could significantly impact similar religious practices and shape the discourse on women's rights within the context of religious traditions in the country.

(With inputs from agencies.)