Supreme Court to hear pleas challenging Places of Worship Act today

Ahead of Thursday hearing on petitions challenging the validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, several political leaders, including CPI(M) leader Prakash Karat and RJD MP Manoj Jha, have moved the Supreme Court seeking to be heard on the contentious issue.

Enacted by Parliament during the PV Narasimha Rao Government, the 1991 Act prohibits conversion of any place of worship, except the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid at Ayodhya, and freezes the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947.

A three-judge Special Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Viswanathan is scheduled to take up the matter on December 12.

Six petitions against the law

• There are six pleas, including those filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay and ex-RS MP Subramanian Swamy, against certain provisions of the law
• The PILs are challenging the 1991 law that prohibits filing a lawsuit to reclaim a place of worship or seek a change in its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947

Muslim side opposes changes

• In June 2022, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind moved the SC seeking dismissal of petitions against the Act, saying it will open floodgates of litigation against countless mosques in India
• The Gyanvapi mosque panel too has opposed the pleas, saying perceived injustices shouldn’t undermine the secularism upheld by the Act

“The party is interested in upholding constitutional fraternity and also secularism, equality, and the rule of law, which are principles enshrined in the Constitution. The applicant seeks intervention in this matter to highlight the constitutional and societal importance of the Act, fearing that tinkering with it would harm India’s communal harmony and secular fabric,” Karat submitted.

In his impleadment application, RJD MP Manoj Jha submitted that the Act highlighted the obligations of a secular state and there was no need for the top court to declare it unconstitutional.

Seeking to intervene in the matter, NCP (Sharad Pawar) MLA Jitendra Satish Awhad submitted that any alterations in the Act could jeopardise India’s communal harmony and secular fabric, thereby threatening the sovereignty and integrity of the nation.

The Indian Union Muslim League general secretary and Kerala MLA PK Kunhalikutty and Lok Sabha MP ET Muhammed Basheer have filed an intervention urging the top court to hear the party before taking a call on the validity of the Act.

There are six petitions, including those filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay and former Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy, against certain provisions of the law. Some of the petitions have been pending since 2020.

The petitioners against the 1991 Act alleged that it created an “arbitrary and irrational retrospective cut-off date” of August 15, 1947, for maintaining the character of the places of worship or pilgrimage against encroachments done by “fundamentalist-barbaric invaders and law-breakers”.

The top court had on January 9, 2023, sought responses of the Centre on pending pleas challenging certain provisions of the 1991 Act which took away the right of judicial remedy to reclaim a place of worship of any person or a religious group.

The hearing assumes significance in view of the fact that there are several mosques and dargahs which Hindu groups have sought to reclaim on the ground that they were built on pre-existing temples.

In June 2022, the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind moved the Supreme Court seeking dismissal of petitions challenging the validity of the Act, saying it will open floodgates of litigation against countless mosques across India.

The Gyanvapi Mosque management committee too has moved the Supreme Court to oppose petitions challenging the validity of the Act, saying historical wrongs or perceived injustices of the past should not undermine the principles of secularism and non-retrogression upheld by the Act.