The Supreme Court of India has strongly disapproved of the misuse of Public Interest Litigations (PILs), observing that the petition concerning the entry of women into the Sabarimala temple should have been outrightly dismissed. The remarks were made by a bench while hearing a batch of petitions related to alleged discrimination against women at various religious sites, including the Sabarimala temple in Kerala.
Court's Observations on PIL Abuse
The bench expressed concern over the growing trend of filing PILs for issues that do not serve genuine public interest. It noted that such litigations often burden the judiciary and divert attention from pressing matters. The court emphasized that PILs were intended to help the underprivileged and address systemic failures, not to be used as a tool for personal or political agendas.
Sabarimala Case Context
The Sabarimala temple, dedicated to Lord Ayyappa, traditionally barred women of menstruating age (10 to 50 years) from entering. In 2018, a five-judge Constitution bench lifted the ban, sparking widespread protests and subsequent review petitions. The current hearing was part of a larger examination of religious practices that allegedly discriminate against women.
The Supreme Court's critical stance on the Sabarimala PIL underscores its commitment to preserving the sanctity of PIL jurisdiction. The court reiterated that PILs must be filed in good faith and with genuine public interest, failing which they invite strict action.
