22 C
New Delhi
October 30, 2020

#SabrimalaCase: Critically Analysis of the Justice Indu Malhotra verdict

A month ago Supreme Court of India gave the Case in the favour entry to  irrespective to all age group women. In this judgement, Justice Indu Malhotra judgement gave the dissenting judgement. As a feminist, student of Constitutional law  I am shocked with her Judgement.

[breaking_news_ticker id=”1″ t_length=”35″ bnt_cat=”” post_type=”post” title=”Breaking News” show_posts=”5″ tbgcolor=”222222″ bgcolor=”333333″ bnt_speed=”500″ bnt_direction=”up” bnt_interval=”3000″ border_width=”0″ border_color=”222222″ border_style=”solid” border_radius=”0″ show_date=”show” date_color=”b23737″ controls_btn_bg=”dd3333″ bnt_buttons=”on”]

In this Article I will likely to critically analysis the judgement of justice  Indu Malhotra 

(1) In her judgement She contained that there is no aggrieved party in this case. From this statement his intention is clear that Public interest system should be abolished in the India which was introduced by the Justice PN Bhagwati for the getting the justice to indigent person.

[maxbutton id=”3″ text=”#SabarimalaVerdict” ]

(2) her another argument is that Right to freedom of freedom can not be tested within the  limit of Article 14. This statement is contrary to Article 25 (2) which clearly says that Right conferred under the Right to freedom of religion is subject to public order, morality and health and other fundamental right the intention of this Article clear that  As the name of Right to freedom of religion, other fundamental right of individual can not be violated.

Read Also, #SabarimalaVerdict: Violation of Woman right in Sabrimala Temple

(3) In her third argument, she contained that Women can not observe the tradition Vrahturam while there is no scientific reason of this statement that women. Can not observe the tradition of vrahturam. It is nothing more than patriarchal mentality and In her written statement, Respondent also mentioned that before the 1960  Women of. All age group had the right to worship in Sabrimala.

13 December is the date of hearing of review petition on this issue. As a student of Constitution I hope from supreme Court  Supreme Court will upheld the validity Indian young Lawyer Association v.  State of kerala.

Critical Remark by, Rajesh Yadav.

Related posts

IAS Topper Rank 6 Shubham Gupta’s Success Story

Trilok Singh

Unite against the big C: The Big ‘C’ of corruption

Trilok Singh

Welcome Sir…..Hello World✈

Trilok Singh

Study: People with HIV at increased risk of COPD

Trilok Singh

Internal Security (IS) General Study III Mains : Model Test Questions and Answers

Trilok Singh

Gen Bipin Rawat to be superannuating on Dec 31

Trilok Singh
IASmind

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy

Ad Blocker Detected!

Refresh