'Women not discriminated against in Vedas, Upanishads, then why in Sabarimala?', asks SC

New Delhi: Hearing the petition seeking removal of ban on entry of women of menstrual age in the revered Sabarimala, the Supreme Court, Friday, questioned the basis of such discrimination.

Questioning the Travancore Devaswom Board, the apex court observed that when holy texts like the Vedas and Upanishads do bot discriminate against women then why is that they are discriminated against at Sabarimala.

"If you go by Sanatana dharma, men and women were treated equal. Is spirituality a domain of men alone"? asks SC.

In response, Board's lawyer KK Venugopal said, “ It is fundamental to the faith and requires a deep analysis by your lordships.”

The court gave the Board six weeks time to submit its response in the case.

"It is fundamental to the faith and requires a deep analysis by your lordships", KK Venugopal for Devaswom Board.

Matter adjourned for six weeks as temple management seeks 6 weeks time to collect all materials & file response,

The court also appointed Senior Advocate Raju Ramachandran as amicus Curiae in the case.

The matter came to the court after a organisation called the Indian Young Lawyers' Association headed by Naushad Ahmed Khan filed a PIL - on Jan 11 - saying that women cannot be banned under the Constitution.

Interestingly, the Kerala government has told the Supreme Court that banning entry of women of menstrual age in historic Sabarimala temple in the state is a "matter of religion" and it is duty bound to "protect the right to practice the religion of these devotees".

In an affidavit, the state government said administration of the temple vests with the Travancore Devaswom Board under the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act and the decision of the priests is final in the matter of worship.