'No Anarchy': SC Says Sabarimala, Other Religious Institutions Must Follow Norms

The Supreme Court on Tuesday underscored that the right to manage a religious institution must be exercised within a structured framework, stressing that there cannot be anarchy and that clear modalities and norms are essential for its functioning.

The remark came from a nine-judge Constitution bench during hearings on petitions concerning discrimination against women at religious sites, including the Sabarimala Temple in Kerala, as well as the scope of religious freedom across faiths.

The bench comprised Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices B V Nagarathna, M M Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Augustine George Masih, Prasanna B Varale, R Mahadevan, and Joymalya Bagchi.

Advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for Peerzada Syed Altamash Nizami, a direct ancestral descendant in the Chisti Nizami lineage associated with the dargah of Hazrat Khwaja Nizamuddin Aulia, submitted that a dargah is a burial site of a saint.

"Within Islam, there are differing views regarding the status of saints after death, but in the Sufi system of belief, there is deep reverence attached to the place where a saint is interred.

"The Sufi system of belief in India consists of several major orders, including the Chishtiya, Qadriya, Naqshbandiya and Suhrawardiya. The present case concerns the Chishtiya order.This system, I submit, clearly constitutes a religious denomination. If one looks at the teachings attributed to Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya, there is emphasis on adherence to Islamic practices such as roza, namaz, hajj, zakat, and above all, faith," Pasha said.

He argued that regulating entry into a religious institution falls within its management rights.

At this point, Justice Amanullah observed that the right to manage cannot imply a lack of structure and that a defined modality is necessary in all cases.

"There cannot be anarchy.Take a dargah or a temple. There will be elements associated with the institution, the manner of worship, the sequence in which things are done. Somebody has to regulate that.

"It cannot be that everyone says I will do whatever I want, or that the gates remain open at all times without any control. So the question is, who is that body which manages. That is where protection comes in, because regulation is necessary. At the same time, it cannot transgress constitutional limitations. There cannot be discrimination on the broad constitutional parameters," Justice Amanullah said, adding that every institution must have norms rather than being governed by individual discretion.

The hearing is ongoing.

The court had earlier noted that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for a judicial forum to lay down parameters to determine whether a religious practice is essential or non-essential.

In a 4:1 majority verdict in September 2018, a five-judge Constitution bench struck down the ban on the entry of women aged 10 to 50 into the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple, ruling the centuries-old practice illegal and unconstitutional.

(with PTI inputs)