Supreme Court of India questions the foundation of the PIL that led to the landmark Indian Young Lawyers Association vs State of Kerala verdict.
May 5, 2026: The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday raised serious concerns over the basis of the 2006 public interest litigation that led to its 2018 ruling allowing entry of women of all ages into the Sabarimala Temple. A nine-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant remarked that the petition “ought not to have been entertained” and said the material relied upon did not merit judicial consideration.
During the hearing, the bench questioned the credibility of the documents submitted, noting that reliance on newspaper reports and unverified material was inappropriate. Justice B V Nagarathna criticised the misuse of PILs, stating they have increasingly become tools for “publicity, paisa and political interest,” while Justice M M Sundresh termed the case an “abuse of the process of law.” The court also raised concerns about the intent and locus of the petitioners.
The proceedings stem from the 2018 judgment in Indian Young Lawyers Association vs State of Kerala, which struck down the ban on entry of women aged 10–50 into the temple. The current nine-judge bench is examining broader constitutional questions, including the balance between equality and religious freedom, and the extent of judicial intervention in matters of faith.