During the hearing on the Sabarimala reference case, Justice B.V. Nagarathna made notable remarks regarding the nature of evidence and the reliability of information presented before the court. The Supreme Court bench was addressing complex constitutional questions concerning religious freedom, gender equality, and the powers of the judiciary to intervene in "essential religious practices."

The "WhatsApp University" comment arose when a submission or reference during the arguments appeared to lack a verified historical or legal basis. Justice Nagarathna emphasized that the court’s deliberations must be grounded in authentic texts, established precedents, and verified historical records rather than anecdotal or unverified information circulating on social media platforms.

Key Highlights of the Hearing:

Judicial Rigor: The bench underscored that high-stakes constitutional matters involving the intersection of Article 25 (Freedom of Religion) and Article 14 (Equality) require a high standard of scholarly and legal evidence.
Essential Religious Practices: The reference seeks to clarify the "Essential Religious Practices" test, which determines whether a specific ritual or tradition is fundamental to a religion and thus protected from state interference.
Combating Misinformation: The observation reflects a broader judicial concern regarding the infiltration of unverified digital narratives into legal discourse. Justice Nagarathna’s remark serves as a reminder to the bar that the court relies on "authoritative sources" rather than popular opinion or unauthenticated digital content.

The Sabarimala reference case is of significant importance as it will establish a definitive framework for how courts handle conflicts between individual rights and the autonomy of religious denominations across various faiths.