Judicial overload

The Supreme Court’s recent rebuke for the flood of petitions concerning the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, highlights the growing politicisation of religious disputes. The Act, introduced during the PV Narasimha Rao government, was meant to prevent further communal discord by freezing the religious character of places of worship as of August 15, 1947, with the sole exception of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute. However, it now finds itself at the centre of legal and political manoeuvring. The SC’s frustration is understandable. The surge of intervention applications, many filed by political leaders and organisations, reflects an unsettling trend — using the judiciary as a battleground for religious and electoral gains. On December 12, 2024, the SC had already issued an interim order restraining lower courts from entertaining fresh suits or ordering surveys concerning religious sites. Yet, fresh petitions continue to pour in, prompting Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna to declare, “Enough is enough.” The court has rightly refused to entertain new pleas unless they raised entirely fresh legal questions.

At stake is not just the integrity of the judicial process but also India's secular fabric. The law was designed to ensure communal harmony, yet its very existence is now being challenged by certain groups who argue that it unjustly legitimises historical wrongs. Meanwhile, political parties like the Congress, Samajwadi Party and the AIMIM have intervened in favour of the Act, alleging that legal challenges to it are aimed at targeting Muslim religious sites.

The judiciary must tread carefully, balancing legal scrutiny with the need to prevent communal tensions from escalating. With the hearing deferred to April, the legal battle over the Places of Worship Act is far from over. But one thing is clear — the courts must remain a space for justice, not a stage for political theatrics.