Supreme Court asks senior advocate and lawyer Rajeev Dhavan to explain whether judges, functioning as a constitutional court, must rise above their personal religious conscience when called upon to examine matters of freedom of conscience | Photo credit: Sushil Kumar Verma
The Supreme Court on Friday (April 17, 2026) asked senior advocate and lawyer Rajeev Dhavan to clarify whether judges, functioning as a constitutional court, must rise above their personal religious conscience while being called upon to examine matters of freedom of conscience.
The question came from Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, who is a member of the nine-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, which was hearing the Sabarimala case, which involved a review primarily of the extent to which courts could judicially review religious practices and whether “inquisitorial” scrutiny would be a violation of Article 25 (freedom of conscience and the right to free occupation and propagation of 2) matters).
“You said freedom of conscience has a very broad meaning. Are you suggesting that as judges, as a constitutional court, religion and conscience cannot be equated, because religion may be personal to me, but when I have to judge, I have to rise above that religious consciousness to a level where I balance it with constitutional provisions and see how the bigger picture emerges?” Justice Amanullah asked Mr Dhavan.
Published – 17 Apr 2026 21:37 IST
