The Indian government argued before the Supreme Court that Indian society uniquely reveres women, countering Western notions of patriarchy. While defending restrictions on women's entry to the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, the government stated that religious practices should remain beyond judicial review, challenging the 2018 ruling that lifted the ban.

• 01The Indian government claims that Indian society uniquely reveres women, opposing Western views of patriarchy.
• 02Restrictions on women's entry to Sabarimala temple are defended as a matter of religious faith, beyond judicial scrutiny.
• 03The government criticized the 2018 Supreme Court ruling that allowed women of menstruating age to enter the temple.
• 04The solicitor general emphasized that the judiciary lacks the expertise to interpret sacred texts and should not impose secular standards on religious practices.
• 05The argument suggests that gender equality should not be conflated with religious freedom under Article 25 of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court's decision on this case could significantly affect women's access to religious sites in India, influencing broader discussions on gender equality and religious freedom.