Published Feb 16, 2026 | 12:38 PM ⚊ Updated Feb 16, 2026 | 1:16 PM
Supreme Court of India. Credit: iStock
Synopsis: Supreme Court has referred review petitions against its 2018 Sabarimala verdict to a nine-judge Constitution Bench. Written submissions are due by 14 March, with hearings scheduled from 7–22 April. The Bench will also examine related issues on women’s rights in religious practices. NSS has urged the Kerala government to oppose women’s entry into Sabarimala. Meanwhile, seven key constitutional questions on faith and rights will be examined.
The Supreme Court on Monday, 16 February, took up the review petitions against its 2018 verdict allowing women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. The court directed all parties to file their written submissions by 14 March before proceeding further with the matter.
The court appointed senior advocate K Parameswaran as amicus curiae in the case. The court has also made it clear that all the petitions will be heard by a nine-member Constitution Bench.
The court directed the Kerala government and other parties to file their stand on the issue by 14 March. Arguments before the larger Bench will begin on 7 April and continue till 22 April.
A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant passed the order while hearing a batch of petitions dealing with religion and women’s rights.
The petitions include challenges to the 2018 verdict that allowed women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple. In total, 67 petitions are before the court raising questions about the balance between women’s personal liberty and religious practices.
Cases also cover issues like:
The nine-judge Bench will examine the wider constitutional questions linked to religion and gender equality. Krishan Kumar Singh has been named as the nodal counsel representing the review petitioners.
Advocate on record Shivam Singh will assist amicus curiae Parmeswaran and help draft written arguments that capture the views of all sides.
When some lawyers sought a change in the hearing dates, the Chief Justice declined the request, saying that the nine-judge Bench case was of the highest priority and that counsel should rearrange their other matters accordingly.
The court also pointed out that objections had earlier been raised about whether the case could be sent to a larger Bench. However, in its February 2020 ruling, a nine-judge Bench had already clarified that questions of law can be referred to a bigger Bench even at the review stage. Since this issue has already been settled, the court said it will not revisit it.
Referring to its order dated 10 February 2020, the court noted that seven key legal questions were framed for consideration by a nine-judge Bench. The forthcoming hearings are meant to resolve these pending legal questions once and for all.
According to the schedule, parties who filed the review petitions and those supporting them will be heard from 7 April to 9 April. Original petitioners and those opposing the review petitions, as well as supporters of their stand, will be heard from 14 April to 16 April. Any reply submissions will be taken up on 21 April.
The amicus curiae is expected to complete final arguments by 22 April.
Meanwhile, Nair Service Society (NSS) General Secretary G Sukumaran Nair said the Kerala government has so far protected the traditional customs at Sabarimala over the past six years, even while the case on women’s entry was pending before the Supreme Court.
He said both the government and the Devaswom Board must now change their stand on the issue. According to him, the government should clearly oppose the entry of women into the shrine and uphold existing customs. Nair added that the NSS would pursue legal remedies if future decisions go against their position.
Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Yogam (SNDP) General Secretary Vellapally Natesan responded that the government had not made serious efforts to implement the earlier Supreme Court verdict allowing women’s entry into Sabarimala, as it was aware of strong public sentiment on the issue. He expressed hope that the government would make a wise decision this time as well.
On the question of filing an affidavit before the court, Natesan said it was for the government to decide whether to submit one or not and that SNDP Yogam would not interfere in that matter.
He also stressed that customs and traditions must be protected and said they should be changed only if they are harmful to society. However, he maintained that women’s entry into Sabarimala was not acceptable, pointing out that women were not allowed to enter the temple even in earlier times.
SNDP Yogam general secretary Vellapally Natesan said that, the government had not made serious efforts to implement the earlier Supreme Court verdict allowing women’s entry into Sabarimala, as it was aware of strong public sentiment on the issue. He expressed hope that the government would take a wise decision this time as well.
On the question of filing an affidavit before the court, Natesan said it was for the government to decide whether to submit one or not and that SNDP Yogam would not interfere in that matter.
He also stressed that customs and traditions must be protected and said they should be changed only if they are harmful to society. However, he maintained that women’s entry into Sabarimala was not acceptable pointing out that women were not allowed to enter the temple even in earlier times.
Leader of Opposition VD Satheesan said the Kerala government must change its affidavit on the issue today itself. He criticised the government for lacking a clear stand and alleged that it was trying to appease devotees for votes while avoiding a firm stand on the matter.
Meanwhile, BJP state president Rajeev Chandrasekhar said the party’s position on Sabarimala issue remains the same as it was in 2018. However, he alleged that the government might take a U-turn on the matter as elections are approaching.
