The Supreme Court of India, while reviewing its previous decision allowing women of child-bearing age to enter the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, stated that no religion can be 'hollowed out' in the name of social welfare and reform. The nine-judge bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, discussed the complexities of balancing freedom of religion with social reform. The court acknowledged the challenge of declaring the beliefs of millions as incorrect, with Justice MM Sundresh questioning whether the court can rule on such matters without hearing from those affected. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the Travancore Devaswom Board, argued for a balanced interpretation of Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution, which pertain to religious freedom and institutional management. He cautioned against judges determining what constitutes essential religious practices, advocating that such assessments should come from within the community. The hearing, which continues on Thursday, addresses a long-standing ban on women of menstruating age entering the temple, a practice rooted in the belief surrounding the deity, Lord Ayyappa.