Division Bench transfer the matter of Sabrimala to Constitutional Bench

The PIL has been filed before Supreme Court on restriction on the entry of women of particular age gap at Sabrimala Temple. The temple restricts women aged between 10 and 50 from taking the pilgrimage to Sabarimala.
A 1991 Kerala High Court judgment supports the restriction imposed on women devotees. It had found that the restriction were in place since time immemorial and not discriminatory to the Constitution. However, the judgment has not been challenged, the Petitioner approach by way of PIL. Justice Dipak Misra said  that there is no bar on a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court from deciding the issue afresh. “We are not bothered by the principle of res judicata”.
Pandala royal family and several Ayyappa groups that the deity is not “interested” in women devotees of the restricted age bracket from visiting him, Justice Misra said that such arguments, merely based on conjecture without any constitutional basis, cannot be entertained in the Supreme Court.
Justice Misra orally indicated that following questions which the larger Bench would have to answer is whether the restriction is a “permissible practice”; whether the devotees visiting Sabarimala form a religious denomination; thirdly, who is the competent authority to decide on whether the restriction comes within the ambit of ‘custom’; and, fourthly, whether such a ‘custom’ comes under the constitutional principles.