Why in news?
The Sabarimala case review by a five-judge Bench led by then CJI Ranjan Gogoi took a different turn on November 2019.
What did the SC tell?
The Bench sidestepped the task of reviewing the September 2018 judgment, which declared the prohibition on the entry of women of menstruating age into the Sabarimala temple as discriminatory.
Question of essential Religious practices.
- The Bench referred seven questions, including whether essential religious practices should be afforded constitutional protection under Article 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs), to a larger Bench.
- Further, the Review Bench tagged other pending cases on the prohibition of Muslim women from entering mosques, female genital mutilation among Dawoodi Bohras and the ban on Parsi women who married inter-faith from entering the fire temple to the reference
