From Hill Shrine To Mosques & Fire Temples: How Sabarimala Has Rekindled Debate On Women's Rights

Last Updated:February 17, 2026, 11:58 IST

The Sabarimala verdict, and the subsequent rethink, not only triggered a pan-India debate, but also opened the floodgates to women’s right to access places of religious worship

From April 7, the Supreme Court will commence the hearing of review petitions related to its judgment in September 2018 on whether women can be allowed to enter Kerala’s Sabarimala temple.

In 2018, a five-judge bench had struck down the age ban on women entering the hill temple by a majority of 4:1, declaring that Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship Rules, 1965, was unconstitutional as it allowed the ban on women entering the temple on the basis of custom. However, on November 14, 2019, the Supreme Court, by a 3:2 split decision, held that the September judgment may overreach into the domain of other religions too and thus needs a closer look. It chose to hold the petitions seeking review of the judgment pending and then formed a nine-judge bench to deal with the issue.

The Sabarimala judgment, as well as the rethink that followed, not only brought about a debate across the country, but it also opened the gates to women’s rights to access places of worship. The Supreme Court also took up cases based on petitions that arose out of issues related to the entry of Muslim women into mosques, the practice of female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra community, and the plea for entry into fire temples by Parsi women who married outside the community.

Women’s Entry In Mosques

The Sabarimala verdict reignited discussions about women’s entry into mosques in India. Although women are not banned from entering mosques in Islam, in reality, many Indian mosques are restrictive about their entry.

A petition was moved in the Supreme Court seeking a declaration that the practice of restricting Muslim women’s entry into some mosques is unconstitutional, particularly when it comes to women’s prayers being obstructed in the main prayer hall. The petition cited that such practices contravene the basic rights of equality (Article 14), freedom of religion (Article 25), and personal liberty (Article 21) of the Constitution, relying on the Sabarimala verdict.

Some of the petitioners have cited that the Quran does not restrict women’s entry into prayer halls, and historically, women have also participated in mosque prayers. Some legal experts and Islamic scholars (such as the All India Muslim Personal Law Board) have told the Supreme Court that women are allowed to enter mosques and pray namaz if the gender separation is maintained while praying.

Courts in India have also supported women’s rights in certain mosques. For instance, the Telangana High Court held that the Quran does not ban women’s access to mosques and declared the unjust treatment of women in Hyderabad.

Conversely, the mosque management and religious authorities believe that their long-standing tradition of allocating no space to women or providing a separate area is in line with their modesty and gender separation tradition, especially in Sunni mosques. Some communities feel that it is not proper to hold mixed meetings. Even those who support women’s access to mosques demand separate areas for women as a matter of decorum.

Female Genital Mutilation

The connection between the debates on female genital mutilation (FGM) and the Sabarimala issue in India is largely through the general constitutional issue— Whether religious practices can be safeguarded when they violate gender equality and fundamental rights?

As the Sabarimala decision led to a general constitutional challenge to gender discrimination in religious practices in general, across all religions such as Muslim, Hindu, Parsi, and others, the focus was again on FGM in India. Primarily practiced in certain communities of Dawoodi Bohras, where it is commonly known as khatna or khafz, FGM was described as an infringement of bodily integrity and dignity, gender discrimination, and a cruel and harmful practice under child protection statutes in the petitions filed before the Supreme Court.

Although it is argued that the judiciary should not intervene in religious matters within the community and that minority religious practices should be protected, it is also contended that the Constitution is paramount over all religious practices, and harmful practices cannot be protected on the ground of religion.

FGM has now become part of the larger constitutional reference after Sabarimala and the Supreme Court will essentially examine two questions:

1. How should courts determine what counts as an “essential religious practice"?

2. Can courts review religious practices if they violate fundamental rights?

Entry Into Fire Temples

Parsis are the followers of Zoroastrianism in India, and they worship in Agiaries and Atash Behrams, which are fire temples. Fire temples have traditionally restricted entry to Parsis only. A Parsi woman who marries a non-Parsi is considered to have left their ranks and is, in most cases, denied entry into fire temples. But Parsi men who marry outside their community have, at times, been less restricted, and their children have been treated differently.

This question arose during the hearing of the Sabarimala case, where the court was confronted with an important question: Can a religious denomination deny women entry based on their choice of marriage without offending the equality right?

In the case of Goolrokh Gupta v. Burjor Pardiwala, the Bombay High Court held that a Parsi woman who marries outside her community does not necessarily cease to be Parsi by birth. But the management of fire temples is in the hands of religious trusts, and the trustees have the right to control the entry of persons according to their religious traditions. Thus, although the Parsi woman is Parsi by birth, her entry into fire temples may still be denied depending on the trust rules.

The Supreme Court now needs to address whether gender equality overrides denominational autonomy without being seen as interfering with internal identity preservation of a minority community.

News india From Hill Shrine To Mosques & Fire Temples: How Sabarimala Has Rekindled Debate On Women's Rights

Read More