New Delhi: In the debate on faith and belief versus fundamental rights arising from the removal of the traditional ban on entry of menstruating women into the Lord Ayyappa temple at Sabarimala, Justice BV Nagarathna on Tuesday criticized the previous social practice of treating women as ‘untouchable’ for three days every month.Part of the nine-judge Constitution bench headed by CJI Surya Kant, which promised to give a thorough but interesting clarification on constitutional and legal principles on equality, religion, religious practices, faith and belief, Justice Nagarathna said, “As a woman, I do not agree.”Expected to become the first woman Chief Justice of India in September next year, she questioned the social practice of isolating menstruating women and said, “Women cannot have three days of untouchability in a month, after which they are treated normally.”The remarks came when Solicitor General Tushar Mehta was questioning the rationality of the Supreme Court’s September 28, 2018 judgment in the case ‘Indian Young Lawyers Association vs Kerala’, which had tested the practice of barring entry of women in the 10-50 age group. Sabarimala Temple On the test of Article 17, which abolished untouchability and made its practice a punishable offence.She said that women are worshiped in India, and “we have women presidents, prime ministers, governors and constitutional post holders”. Equality for women is the cornerstone of government policies, she said, and therefore, applying the Article 17 test to declare the practice at Sabarimala unconstitutional appears to stretch far beyond the scope of jurisprudence.He said all Ayyappa temples admit women of all ages, but the practice of barring entry of menstruating women in Sabarimala is unique as devotees consider the Lord Ayyappa deity in the temple as a “gnostic celibate”.“This unique attribute of God cannot be tested by the Supreme Court,” Mehta said. He complained that the jurisprudence of testing every issue with the litmus paper of gender equality has unfortunately been confined to constitutional benches in the last few decades. “Women are equal in every aspect and should be treated equally,” she said.Justice MM Sundaresh said it is the Centre’s contention that since the attributes of the deity are intrinsically linked to the faith and belief of the devotees and followers of Lord Ayyappa at Sabarimala, the court cannot test the validity of such faith and belief.Mehta said the Sabarimala temple practice is ‘sui generis’ (of its own kind) and similar features can be found in other religious institutions as well. “One may feel that one’s right to freedom of expression to keep one’s hair open is being violated when one is forced to cover one’s head while entering a shrine or a gurudwara,” he said.