The Supreme Court, while hearing a case concerning gender discrimination in religious institutions such as the Sabarimala temple, made a notable remark on Thursday, stating that it holds the views of eminent authors and thinkers in high regard but cannot depend on information sourced from 'WhatsApp University.' This observation was made by a nine-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, which is currently examining petitions on the extent of religious freedom across various faiths.
The bench also comprised Justices B V Nagarathna, M M Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Augustine George Masih, Prasanna B Varale, R Mahadevan, and Joymalya Bagchi. During the proceedings, senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, representing the head of the Dawoodi Bohra community, referenced an article written by Congress leader Shashi Tharoor that discussed judicial restraint in matters pertaining to religious relief.
In response, Chief Justice Kant emphasized that the court respects eminent individuals and jurists, but personal opinions remain subjective. Kaul argued that knowledge should be welcomed from any source, whether it comes from a country or a university, and that Indian civilization is too rich to reject knowledge. Justice Nagarathna, in a lighter vein, interjected, saying, 'But not from WhatsApp University.' Kaul responded that he was not concerned with judging sources, reiterating that the key point was to accept knowledge irrespective of its origin.
A day earlier, the apex court had observed that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for courts to define what constitutes an essential religious practice. In a landmark 4–1 ruling in September 2018, a five-judge Constitution bench had lifted the ban on women aged 10 to 50 entering the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple, declaring the practice unconstitutional.
