J Sai Deepak Argues in SC on Sabarimala- "That Argument cannot be used!"

Courtesy: Supreme Court of India Hon'ble Chief Justice Surya Kant J Sai Deepak Senior Advocate AM Singhvi Constitution Bench Sabarimala Review Reference Dr. B R Ambedkar K M Munshi Minority Rights vs Fundamental Rights This Video is Strictly for LEGAL AWARENESS & EDUCATION Purpose only The case originated from a 2018 judgment that struck down the ban on women of menstruating age (10–50 years) entering the Sabarimala Temple. While review petitions were filed against this, a five-judge bench in 2019 decided to refer broader questions of law to a larger bench rather than just reviewing the specific Sabarimala verdict. Article 25 - Article 25 of the Indian Constitution guarantees all persons the fundamental right to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice, and propagate religion. This right is not absolute and is subject to public order, morality, health, and other Fundamental Rights. It allows state regulation of associated secular activities and social reform. Article 26 - Article 26 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the freedom to manage religious affairs to every religious denomination or its section, subject to public order, morality, and health. It includes the rights to establish and maintain institutions for religious/charitable purposes, manage their own affairs, and own, acquire, and administer property. The case concerns the interpretation of Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantee the right to freedom of religion and the autonomy of religious denominations. At the heart of the dispute is whether courts can examine and regulate long-standing religious practices, and under what circumstances such practices may be restricted on grounds like public order, morality, or health. The Constitution Bench is also examining broader legal questions, including: a) The scope of judicial review in matters of faith and essential religious practices b) The maintainability of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) in religious issues c) The balance between individual rights and denominational rights d) The extent to which courts can intervene in religious customs followed by large communities This case has far-reaching implications for multiple religious practices across India and is expected to clarify the constitutional position on the intersection of faith, fundamental rights, and judicial authority. This argument raises a fundamental legal and constitutional question: Can courts adjudicate the validity of religious practices at the instance of outsiders, or does this undermine the very essence of religious freedom guaranteed under Articles 25 and 26? MP High Court Live, High Court Live Streaming, Patna High Court Live Stream, Gujarat High Court Live Stream, Madhya Pradesh High Court Live Stream, MP High Court Live, Court Room Live Stream, Court Room, Legal Fact in India , Patna High Court Live Stream Today, Indian High Court live Stream, Justice Jitendra Kumar, Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Justice Sandeep Kumar, Justice Vivek Agarwal, Justice DY Chandrachud Important - If you have anything against my uploads or have any suggestions, please contact me at [email protected]. @LawNowTV #law #sabarimala #mosque #temple #womenempowerment #fundamentalrights #constitutionofindia #trinamoolcongress #westbengal #election #kerala #keralanews #castediscrimination #vote #eci #judge #advocate #shivsena #hindu #uddavthackeray #eknathshinde #SupremeCourt #Sabarimala #Article25 #Article26 #ConstitutionBench #ReligiousFreedom #PIL #indianconstitution #politicalnews #maharashtra #maharashtranews #muslim #politics