The Kerala High Court has recently requested a response from the State government regarding a legal petition filed by a transgender devotee who claims she was denied entry to the Sabarimala temple due to her gender identity. The court’s decision comes after the petitioner, Sathyashri Sharmila Rehemathali, alleged discrimination based on her transgender status when attempting to visit the holy site.
Justice Gopinath P and Justice S Manu presided over the case, which has been scheduled for further review on September 3. The petitioner, Sathyashri Sharmila Rehemathali, identifies as a transgender woman and asserts her devotion as a regular pilgrim to the Sabarimala temple. According to her petition, she arrived at Pamba on August 20, intending to seek the blessings of Lord Ayyappa after fulfilling necessary religious observances, including the Vratham and carrying the Irumudi, which are sacred rituals for devotees.
However, Sharmila was reportedly stopped during a police inspection near the Pamba Ganapathi Temple at approximately 3:30 PM. She was informed that her journey to the temple would not be allowed because she is a transgender person. The petition outlines that officers at the Pamba Police Station stated this decision was based on instructions from the Travancore Devaswom Board, yet no official document supporting this restriction was provided to her.
The petitioner highlighted her previous successful visits to the temple on January 3 and April 15, 2026, where she was allowed to complete her pilgrimage without issue. She argues that the sudden denial is arbitrary and unconstitutional, emphasizing the protections under Section 3(e) of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019. This Act explicitly prohibits the denial of access to public places and religious institutions based on gender identity.
In her plea, Sharmila seeks permission to complete her pilgrimage to Sabarimala and to engage in prayer offerings. Additionally, she requests that the state government disclose any circulars or notifications that impose such restrictions on transgender devotees. Although she aimed to visit the temple on August 26 for the Thiruvonam festival to fulfill a religious offering, the court did not issue an order permitting the pilgrimage.
Representation for the petitioner is provided by advocates Padma Lakshmi and Aleena Dileepkumar, while G Biju serves as the standing counsel for the Travancore Devaswom Board. The case highlights ongoing challenges faced by transgender individuals in accessing religious sites and underscores the need for clarity in policy and legal protections.
