THE SABARIMALA JUDGEMENT, LORD AYYAPPA, AND LAW

BACKGROUND

The issue of women's entry to the Sabarimala Temple has been a burning topic for decades. Women under the age of 10-50 have not been allowed to enter the temple due to prevailing customary practices and the celibacy of the deity residing in the temple. Women under the age of 10 to 50 have always contended that the age-old customary practice of not allowing women of a certain age to enter in Sabarimala temple is discriminatory and violates their constitutional rights or fundamental right to liberty and equality, in particular. In 1990, for the first time, this issue reached the Kerala High Court and it was contended that the court must allow the female devotees to enter the temple. But Kerala High Court judgment was not in favour of female devotees and received criticism for not upholding the rights of women. Later in 2006, six female members of the Indian Young Lawyers’ Association filed a petition in the Supreme Court to declare the age-old customary practice as discriminatory and violative of their constitutional rights and the court shall lift the ban on the entry of women between the age of 10 to 50 at the Sabarimala Temple. After 12 years, in 2018, the Supreme Court held that all women of any age group could enter the temple. Soon after the judgment was delivered, a review petition, along with several writ petitions, was filed before the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court and the judgment must be reviewed by the constitutional bench of not less than seven judges. The petition was accepted and the matter was referred to the larger bench of seven judges. This larger bench will not only consider the entry of women to Sabarimala temple but also the entry of Muslim women into Dargahs/Mosques, the customary practice of female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra Community, and the practice of marriage of Parsi women to a non-Parsi into the holy fireplace of Agyar. The hearings before the larger bench are yet to commence.

THE HISTORY OF THE TEMPLE AND THE DEITY

The Sabarimala temple, devoted to the Lord Ayyappa, is one of the prominent ancient Hindu temples, which is located at Periyar tiger reserve in the Pathanamthitta district of Kerala. This temple is one of the largest annual pilgrimage sites for Hindus but it is open to people of all faiths. Lord Ayyappa9 is a celibate and to show respect for his celibate nature, several practices have been established, one of which is to prohibit women of menstruating age from entering the premises of the temple. The limitation on women entering the temple can be traced back to a tradition that the temple's god, Lord Ayyapa, was a 'Naishtika Brahmachari' (who followed celibacy). The important point is that he doesn’t restrict all the women, but only those, who are menstruating or are in the age group of 10 to 50. Any girl below the age of 10 and any women above the age of 50 are allowed to visit there and no such restrictions are imposed upon them. Every year millions of female devotees, who are not in the age group of 10 to 50, visit there and Lord Ayyappa blesses them. Also, the customs, traditions, and practices of the temple suggest that Lord Ayyappa only asks the female devotees, of age group 10 to 50, to not visit the temple and that his blessings always remain with them. In ancient texts also, it is given that once the period of menstruation is over, the female devotees go to the temple and seek the blessings of Lord Ayyappa. One such custom, that applies to male devotees, who want to see Lord Ayyapppan is that they must purify themselves physically and mentally by observing 41 days of "Vritham" and during this time, male devotees must abstain from eating non-vegetarian food, drinking alcohol, and having any contact with women. Furthermore, devotees wear black clothes and do not shave in order to be identified as devotees of Sri Ayyapan during the 41 days of "Vritham," also known as "KanniAyyapppan”. The temple does not admit women of menstruating age because they would disturb the deity's celibacy and they shall respect his celibacy and decision.

KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT

In S. Mahendran v The Secretary, Travancore Devaswom Board, Thiruvananthapuram & Ors., S. Mahendran was a petitioner and alleged that women between the age of 10 to 50 were visiting the temple and the court shall ban the entry and impose legal restrictions. After taking everything into due consideration, the Kerala High Court banned the entry of women and laid down in its judgment that such age-old restrictions are in accordance with long-standing customs. Further, giving a reasoned judgment, the court held that the Devaswom Board's restriction on women's entry is not in violation of Articles 15, 25, and 26 of the Indian Constitution. Such a restriction is also not in violation of the provisions of the Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorization of Entry) Act, 1965, because there is no restriction in the matter of entry to a temple between one section and another or between one class and another among Hindus, whereas the prohibition is only in respect of women of a specific age group and not women as a class.

THE SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT

When the matter reached the Supreme Court, the court took a divergent view and held that such discriminatory behavior violates a woman's right to visit and enter a temple in order to freely practice Hinduism and express her devotion to Lord Ayyappa. Women's right to worship is severely harmed when this right is denied to them. The verdict was passed with a 4-1 majority and the majority judgment based its decision on the violation of Article 25 (Clause 1) and Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Worship Act. Despite being the only judge to dissent, Justice Indu Malhotra’s separate reason-based judgment attracted appraisal from a wide section of society. According to Justice Malhotra, every person shall be allowed to practice and profess their faith irrespective of whether the practice is rational or logical. It is considered to be an irony that both the majority and minority judgments were based on the same principles of law still their stand or judgment was contradicting each other. Both the judgment cited morality as the basis but took a divergent view on the same issue.

CONFLICT OF LAW AND RELIGION

The Sabarimala judgment sparked a larger debate between law and religion and which one shall prevail when the conflict arises. Both sides wanted to enforce their fundamental rights under Article 25(1) i.e., the Right to freely profess, practice, and propagate one’s religion. The temple authorities were seeking protection under Article 25 and that the practice constitutes an essential element of the rituals. The majority judgment relied on the fact that the temple or its devotees do not constitute a religious denomination and they cannot seek protection under Article 26. What constitutes a religious denomination? To what extent can the judiciary exercise its power to negate essential religious practices? Should the Judiciary create a new phenomenon that did not exist earlier, such as “Constitutional Morality”? Did the court take a narrow view or wider view, while deciding on the matter? Majority judgment or Minority judgment, which judgment was more reason-based, rational, and logical? Perhaps, many more questions arose after the judgment and the larger bench will, certainly, consider these questions and it’s possible that the outcome of this case may come in favor of Lord Ayyappa.

CONCLUSION

The concept of equality, the conflict between law and religion, and Judicial Activism are widening their scope from time to time. Their horizon will continue to increase but the Judiciary will have to exercise judicial restraint as well. Different notions of morality, customs, and religious practices prevail in society but the concept of “Constitutional Morality” may hurt many things because the Judiciary is exercising Judicial activism to the extent that there is no scope for judicial restraint whatsoever. India, being a constitutional democracy, must establish the supremacy of the Constitution but at the same time, it shall preserve the essential religious practices of every religion. Supremacy of law must prevail but customs too must be given due importance. It must be taken into consideration whether any discrimination is a perpetual or partial one and if it is not perpetual then the customary practice must prevail.

Write a comment ...

Poonch in Jammu: The Overlooked Front

Peace, war, and conflict are all measured terms. The enemy state across the border is averse to the term 'peace'. Why was the two nation theory propagated and accepted by the then leadership is the thing of the past now. What remains the reality is that Pakistan is a threat to peace in India. It is true that when a part of the nation bleeds, the whole nation bleeds. When the Pakistan sponsored terrorists carried out ghastly and cowardly attack on tourists in Pahalgam on 22nd April, it shook the conscience of the nation. 26 people were killed out of which 25 were Indians and 1 was from Nepal. The fact is that the attack carried out by the terrorists was not indiscriminate. Hindus were targeted and killed. Why? Because they were Hindus. Because they could not recite Kalma. The motive behind this killing was as clear as the daylight. Every Indian was pained, angry, and was looking upto the government that we will avenge the killing of innocent civilians. Indian response was eagerly awaited by every Indian that how are we going to avenge the killing of innocent civilians who were killed by terrorists in Pahalgam. On 7th May, 2025, the Indian Armed Forces carried out 'Operation Sindoor', the objective of which was to hit 9 terrorists infrastructures in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir. These terror sites acted as an ideological and training base for planning, preparation, and commission of terror activities in India. After India successfully hit all the 9 terror infrastructures, the Indian Armed Forced maintained the position that only terror infrastructures were targeted and that too, in focused, measured, precise, and calibrated manner. What it basically means is that no collateral damage in the form of civilians deaths were caused. We targeted only and only terror infrastructures. As the result, more than 100 terrorists were eliminated. Since the Pakistani Military backs the terrorists in Pakistan, they decided to respond on their behalf and from the evening of 7th May to 10th May, the Pakistani Military violated ceasefire violations and indulged in indiscriminate firing and artillery shelling across Indian side of Border. As the result, civilians particularly in Pooch district of Jammu region were targeted, injured and killed. The actual number is not yet available as to how many civilians have actually been killed or injured as the result of ceasefire violations from Pakistan side. As the result of repeated ceasefire violations and incessant and indiscriminate firing and artillery shelling from Pakistan side, the worst hit area has been Poonch of Jammu Division. So far the government has not provided any official numbers as to how many civilians have been killed or injured, but from Poonch itself, more than 20 people have reportedly been killed. What is more unfortunate is that the plight of people of Jammu, particularly of Border areas such as Poonch, remains underreported. Media houses have shown indifferent attitude towards the people of poonch and border areas who were worst affected as the result of firing and artillery shelling from Pakistan side. Jist, a media portal, served as an exception when it did ground reporting and put in all the efforts to bring before the world the plight of people of Poonch who were killed or injured, whose houses were destroyed as the result of artillery shelling, and who were forced to flee. Following links can be accessed to know the reality from ground and to what extent people have suffered.1) https://youtu.be/kxQcCE3Zon8?si=xfO8fQqufasgnVS6 2) https://youtu.be/zdoC6qdDD8E?si=Go0M0PFvkCmgOV2S 3) https://youtu.be/0hXJQMjV10g?si=SlnuUl5OeiXOJHrD 4) https://youtu.be/uatFVAryue8?si=Sq6eTjwfG88KlPqX 5) https://youtu.be/twsh3_B3dyU?si=8syLI8eGPWY8uo-rThe team of Jist have done a commendable job. This is something that was expected from Indian Media, in general, but unfortunately, they have failed the nation and the people of Poonch. It raises certain questions. People of Poonch are asking if they will always have to pay the price. People of Poonch are asking are their plight not worthy enough of getting reported by National Media. People of Poonch are asking if Pakistan will ever pay the price for killing the innocent civilians in India. Amidst all this, we, as a nation, and our armed forces maintained the position that our enemy are terrorists and we have hit them. We have no grudge against the people of Pakistan. But what did we get in return? Every time Pakistan tried to attack us, the targets were civilians, public infrastructures, and our airbases. They are clear in their ideational or foundational precepts of attack that leave no one, be it civilians in India. We have always been at war. The pause, in any form, is a call for war. India must end it, once and for all. A country the very existence of which is a threat to stability, normalcy, and peace in India or any part of the world for that matter, should cease to exist. We have hit them hard this time but it's not enough. We must be sympathetic towards people living in border states, particularly the people living in Poonch and the places near to the border. We must feel the pain when one life is lost there. We must be equally anguished when there houses are destroyed. We must make sure that Pakistan pay the heavy price for every lives lost. Pakistan is like a half beaten snake. And it's in our backyard which is very close to our Jammu and Kashmir. Given its inherent nature, it will attack again. We have to make sure next time that civilians lives are not lost. Peace comes at a price and people of poonch must not pay the price for it.

Temples in Cage: Faith vs The State

Imagine a captive in a cage whose key is held by the master who defines and redefines the limits of the captive’s freedom inside the cage and the captive’s sustenance entirely depends upon the master's will. In an ordinary sense, it symbolises restriction, control and confinement but in a legal or jurisprudential sense, it symbolises abuse of power, loss of autonomy, and over-regulation. In the face of national concern, a temple signifies the captive, a cage represents the state-made laws for regulation and control of temples, and the state, which holds the key, acts as the master.

India or Bharat?

What’s in a name? Perhaps, everything is in a name. Maharshi Patanjali said 'एक: शब्द: सम्यक् ज्ञात: सप्रयुक्त: स्वर्गे लोके च कामधुग् भवति।' which basically means that “A word properly understood and properly used fulfils all desires". Time and again, people have repeatedly asked this question whenever the renaming policy has been put into practice. People who pose this question, more often than not, try to justify the invasions and colonialism. It is important to know why they pose this question whenever we try to reclaim our ancient identity and the glory attached to a name. In recent times, many cities, towns, and streets have been renamed to reclaim their original name as they stood before their names were changed by foreign invaders or were anglicized by the colonisers. The recurrent attacks by foreign invaders and subjugation by colonial forces were not only aimed at political control and exploitation of economic resources but also at the subversion of native identity and demonization of the socio-cultural conditions of the people of Bharat. And one of the means employed by them to subvert the native identity was the renaming of places as per their whims and fancies. This time, it is not a town, a city, or a street that is in the process of reclamation but the very idea of the nation that we live in. It may be true or it may be a rumour that the Central Government may, in coming days, bring a resolution to rename ‘India’ as ‘Bharat’. Be that as it may, why should we carry a name i.e., India, when this holy land has an ancient, spiritual, and historical name i.e., Bharat? This is a pertinent question that we, as a Bharatiya, should ask ourselves. This act, however, may not itself lead us to a pristine past but this would certainly create an effective framework in the movement of reclamation of native or indigenous identity devoid of forced imported spirit. This process of reclamation of native or indigenous identity may considered to be part of the re-assertion of national consciousness but it may not be limited to decolonisation. What can better highlight the significance of birth in the land of Bharat than गायन्ति देवा: किल गीतकानि धन्यास्तु ते भारत भूमिभागे। स्वर्गापवर्गास्पदमार्गभूते भवन्ति भूय: पुरुषा: सुरत्वात्। which means that ‘the men born in the land of Bharat, the gateway to heavens and salvation, are more blessed than the gods themselves-so sing the gods’. उत्तरं यत् समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् । वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र सन्ततिः - ‘The land to the north of the oceans and south of the Himalayas is called Bharatavarsha, and Bharatis are her children’. We consider this land as divine mother and that is why it was proclaimed that समुद्रवसने देवी पर्वतस्थानमंडले । विष्णुपत्नी नमस्तुभ्यं पादस्पर्शं क्षमस्वमे ॥ which means that ‘O Mother, the Divine Consort of Almighty, with ocean as Thy embroidery and mountains as Thy breasts, forgive me for touching Thee with my feet’. When Swami Vivekananda was returning from England to Bharat, he was asked what he thought of his motherland after having visited the luxuriant countries of the West like America and England. He said, "Bharat, I loved before. But now every particle of dust in Bharat is extremely holy. It has become a place of pilgrimage for me." Nothing can better explain the significance of ‘Bharat’ than the examples given above. We do not consider this land as a mere territory or an abstract entity but so much more than that. It was always the idea of Bharat which people lived by. The struggle for independence was not for the idea of India posited by the Britishers but the idea of Bharat for which people sacrificed their lives. It has been stated in Bankim Chandra Chatterjee’s ‘Vande Mataram’ that ‘When millions upon millions of voices roar out your name, and millions upon millions of swords rise up to defend you, who says, Mother, that you are weak?’. Therefore, what encapsulates the best is the term ‘Bharat’ and not the term ‘India’. There is no reason why we should carry a term given to us by the ones who considered us, Bharatiyas, of lower status and degraded our lives in every way possible. In order to have a national consciousness, that is indigenous in matter and spirit, we have to adopt a process of reclamation in the best way possible. When the other civilizations have disappeared into the limbo of history, Bharat remains a long-surviving and thriving civilizational state. So, why should we not head in a direction that can lead us to indigeneity, and decolonization, and instill in us the sense of Bharatiyata? In a poem titled “Brook” by Tennyson, Brook says, “Men may come and men may go, but I go on forever.” This is what describes the land of Bharat. Come what may, this ancient land has always survived and will continue to survive and thrive.

Transparency and Accountability in the Judiciary

Transparency, in its real essence, is a lead driver to the accountability of any institution in a democratic country. The emergence of the Indian Constitution brought, with itself, a series of fundamental developments, that are required in a democratic country. Three major institutions - Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary - got the mandate from the Constitution as to what will be their structure, composition, powers, and functions. While the three institutions have been conferred with certain powers and functions to perform, Judiciary enjoys, to a great extent, exclusive powers as it can check the validity of actions performed by the legislature and executive and subsequently, declare those actions, if not found in consonance with constitutional provisions, as unconstitutional. Constitutionalism seeks to keep checks and balances on the legislature and the executive because these two institutions are conferred with powers to make the law and implement the law, which could have both positive and negative effects on the citizens of this country. Consistent efforts, though not sufficient, have been made to bring a greater degree of transparency in the legislature and Executive. Because of existing and evolving transparency in the actions of legislature and executive, both have been made accountable for their actions from time to time. But the same cannot be said about the Judiciary. The judiciary, being the custodian of the Indian Constitution, separates itself from the other two organs in terms of power and supervisory mechanism. In that case, the Independence of the Judiciary becomes highly important and crucial so much so it does not get influenced by the other two organs. Independence, undoubtedly, is important yet crucial for any institution. However, should that make an institution immune from transparency and accountability in the garb of maintaining independence? The answer would be negative. The judiciary should be no exception here. In a democratic country, every institution is supposed to be held accountable for its actions notwithstanding what its role and powers are. Non-transparency leads to non-accountability. Therefore, can accountability be imposed upon Judiciary, assuming that there is no transparency in its choices and actions? The answer would again be negative. Courts, at times, are referred to as the temples of justice but does that make judges the gods, who ought not to be questioned or held accountable? Certainly, not. Questions, concerning the lack of transparency in the Judiciary, have always been raised. However, in recent times, it has gained more significance as far as the matter of appointment and transfer of judges, allocation of cases, live-streaming of court proceedings, and political affiliations are concerned. The Law Commission of India, in its fourteenth report on Judicial Administration, observed that “It is obvious that the selection of the Judges constituting a court of such pivotal importance to the progress of the nation must be a responsibility to be exercised with great care.” It further observed that “Such a result can be achieved and maintained only by the exercise of courage, vision, and imagination in the selection of judges made with an eye solely to their efficiency and capacity.” Retd. Justice Ranjan Gogoi, during his tenure as Chief Justice of India, was part of the bench, which gave many remarkable and historic verdicts, and among them, one such was the Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal, which was related to the transparency, accountability, and independence of the judiciary. The judgment serves as a guiding light as far as questions related to judicial transparency are concerned. In Supreme Court, three appeals were filed challenging the 2010 judgment of the Delhi high court in Secretary General, Supreme Court of India v Subhash Chandra Agarwal, which was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2019. One important substantial question of law was as to whether the concept of independence of the judiciary requires and demands the prohibition of furnishing the information sought. This question deals with the concept of judicial independence and judicial transparency, and whether the securement of judicial independence could be an exception to the non-maintainability of judicial transparency. The answer, per curiam, was negative. While the court was of the opinion that judicial independence is based on constitutional safeguards and non-interference of legislature and executive, the same is not immune from checks and balances and transparency is important in the functioning of the judiciary in matters of judicial appointments or selection. Non-disclosure of information cannot be one of the means to achieve judicial independence so much so it forms part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. The judiciary must understand that it only enjoys such powers as the Constitution of India confers upon it. As it was remarked by the Supreme Court in Raja Ram Pal v. Hon’ble Speaker, Lok Sabha, 2007 that “The Constitution is the suprema lex in this country and is beyond the pale of any controversy. This includes the Supreme Court also which represents the judicial organ.” Every organ has to understand that it is the Constitution that is supreme and sovereign and must adhere to the principles of constitutional morality. It is time for the judiciary to introspect and do away with the mindset of having conferred with unfettered powers and must aim towards bringing transparency and accountability to the institution.

Relevance of Global Institutions

On Feb 6 1968 in Washington D.C, Martin Luther King jr was delivering a speech on "A proper sense of priorities". In his closing remarks, he said "On some positions cowardice asks the question, is it safe? Expediency asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? But conscience asks the question, is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right." Surely, this speech was delivered to express his opposition to the Vietnam war, which ravaged Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam very badly. But his emphasis on the word "Conscience" was relevant then and relevant now. A global institution like United Nations was set up in 1945 in the backdrop of the second world war, to maintain and promote international peace and security, develop cordial relationships among nations, address issues and achieve international coordination, and many other things. Basically, global institutions were established to make this world a utopian world. But our conscience should ask, whether global institutions like, UN, UNSC, WHO, etc have done their duty or not? Have they achieved everything, for what they were established decades ago? I would argue, no. The larger question is not about trust or confidence in these institutions but about the working and operationalization of these institutions. Democratic but not democratic nature has made these global institutions prone to blunders. When it comes to the democratization of global institutions, they don't follow democratic principles at all. One of the biggest examples of this is UNSC. UNSC is one of the six main organs of the UN. But the irony is that all the powers are vested in only 5 countries, who were part of allied powers in the Second world war. Many a time, global institutions have tried to encroach upon the sovereignty of many countries. UN portrays itself as the torchbearer of democratic principles and free speech and expressions, but since its inception in 1945, it never acted as a prudent body. When these institutions sway away from their spirit, the role of sovereign nations becomes more important. The onus falls on independent nations to act strongly with or without any prejudice. In this pandemic, the role of WHO and its authenticity and credibility is getting questioned day by day. When the whole of humanity is ravaged by the pandemic, and in this grave time, if the role of WHO is getting questionable for defending China every time, then nothing could be more grave than this. The recent coup in Myanmar exposes the role of all the global institutions across the world. All the global institutions have to understand that all the powers cannot be vested in few countries. It's time for countries to stand up together and challenge these global institutions for their biases and prejudices. It's always important to know about another side of the coin, but it seems, for global institutions, only one side of the coin fulfills their bag of decisions. There can't be another example other than the Israel-Palestine conflict. Probe against only Israel signifies the mindset, that many countries and global institutions possess against Israel. It's like saying, I am anti-zionist but not anti-semitic. We all know, how easily terrorism is spreading across the world. After a neverending war in Afghanistan, the powers are again getting transferred to the Taliban, a terrorist group. Unfortunately, a ray of hope or peace doesn't exist in Afghanistan or any other country, where terrorist groups are spreading their web day by day. Sooner or later, we all have to agree that Global institutions have failed to fulfill their promise and duty. It's better to get away with the membership of the global institutions. Change is constant.

HOW CAN WE BRING UP YOUTH TO WALK IN THE WISDOM OF SWAMI VIVEKANANDA?

‘Arise! Awake! And stop not till the goal is reached.’ These great and ever inspiring words find their origin in the Katha Upanishad or the Kathopanishad, which is one of the primary Upanishads in ancient Indian texts. Swami Vivekanand took inspiration from the shloka i.e., mentioned in the Kathopanishad, and reiterated this ever-inspiring quote all his life and the same could be witnessed in several of his lectures, letters, essays, and public discourses. These words carry immense value with them and this is the main reason why they inspired people then, they inspire people now and they will continue to inspire coming generations for ages. Furthermore, Swami Vivekananda’s vision of Bharat always considered the youth as the torchbearer or forerunner. He has explained how a child is an optimist when after he is born but he becomes a pessimist at the end part of life. After birth, a child is in the age of seeing golden dreams and thus, he is an optimist. When his age of youth arrives, he becomes more optimistic and it’s hard for him to believe in things like death, defeat, or degradation. It’s because he dares to think that he can always win at any point of his life under any circumstances. In his youth, his will to achieve the impossible drives his inner thoughts and it matters the most. But when the old age or end part of life arrives, he witnesses a mass of ruins of dreams that he dreamt of in the age of youth and which have now vanished and he cannot achieve them now and thus, becomes a pessimist. Through this, Swami Vivekananda has tried to send a message that a dream or a vision can only be achieved at the age of youth.

THE SABARIMALA JUDGEMENT, LORD AYYAPPA, AND LAW

Shubham srivastav

I’m a law student who writes about India—its roots, rules, and everything in between. Sharing thoughts that matter for India’s future.

2 Followers

1 Following

Poonch in Jammu: The Overlooked Front

Shubham srivastav

Temples in Cage: Faith vs The State

Shubham srivastav

India or Bharat?

Shubham srivastav

Transparency and Accountability in the Judiciary

Shubham srivastav

Relevance of Global Institutions

Shubham srivastav

ESSENTIALITY OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND ROLE OF SUSTAINABILITY IN PROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS

Shubham srivastav

HOW CAN WE BRING UP YOUTH TO WALK IN THE WISDOM OF SWAMI VIVEKANANDA?

Shubham srivastav