Places of Worship Act: SC restrains courts from passing final or survey orders in pending suits against religious structures

The SC bench granted four weeks to Centre to file an affidavit in a batch of petitions challenging certain provisions of the Places of Worship Act that prohibit the filing of a lawsuit to reclaim a religious place or seek a change in its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947. Representational pic

The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday restrained all the courts across the country from passing any effective interim or final order, including orders of survey in pending suits against existing religious structures, reported news agency ANI.

A bench of Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, and Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan also ordered that no fresh suits can be registered over such claims while the apex court is hearing pleas challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

"As the matter is sub-judice before this court, we deem it fit to direct that while suits may be filed, no suits would be registered and proceedings undertaken till further orders of this court. In the pending suits, courts would not pass any effective interim order or final orders, including orders of survey," the bench ordered, according to ANI.

The court was informed that currently, there are 18 pending suits in the country against 10 mosques or shrines.

The SC bench also granted four weeks to Centre to file an affidavit in a batch of petitions challenging certain provisions of the Places of Worship Act that prohibit the filing of a lawsuit to reclaim a religious place or seek a change in its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947, ANI reported.

The pleas challenged the Places of Worship Act saying that the law takes away the rights of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs to restore their 'places of worship and pilgrimages', destroyed by invaders.

'Pleas against the Act will open floodgates of litigations against countless mosques'

The petitioners who have filed the pleas against the Places of Worship Act, 1991, include the Maharaja Kumari Krishna Priya, who is the daughter of the Kashi Royal Family, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy, Former Member of Parliament Chintamani Malviya, retired army officer Anil Kabotra, advocates Chandra Shekhar and Rudra Vikram Singh from Varanasi, religious leader Swami Jeetendranand Saraswati, Mathura resident and religious leader Devkinandan Thakur Ji, and advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, among others.

The 1991 provision is an Act to prohibit the conversion of any place of worship and to provide for the maintenance of the religious character of a religious structure as it existed on August 15, 1947, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, India Muslim Personal Law Board, Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masjid - which manages the mosque in the Gyanvapi complex - the Shahi Idgah mosque committee of Mathura, among others, also filed applications in the top court against the petitions challenging the validity of certain provisions of the Places of Worship Act.

They challenged the petitions filed by some Hindu petitioners on the grounds that entertaining the pleas against the Places of Worship Act will open floodgates of litigations against countless mosques across India.

They requested the court's intervention in the case and they sought the dismissal of pleas challenging the Places of Worship Act.

One of the pleas challenging the 1991 Act stated, "The Act excludes the birthplace of Lord Rama but includes the birthplace of Lord Krishna, though both are the incarnation of Lord Vishnu, the creator and equally worshipped all over the world."

'Act blatantly offends right of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs'

The pleas further stated that the Act "blatantly offends" the right of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs to "restore, manage, maintain and administer the places of worship and pilgrimage guaranteed under Article 26 of the Indian Constitution".

The petitions filed have challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991, which it said violates the principles of secularism and the rule of law, which is an integral part of the Preamble and the basic structure of the Constitution.

According to the pleas, the Act has taken away the right to approach the Court and thus, the right to judicial remedy has been closed.

Section 3 of the Act bars the conversion of places of worship. It states, "No person shall convert any place of worship of any religious denomination or any section thereof into a place of worship of a different section of the same religious denomination or of a different religious denomination or any section thereof."

Under the Act, Section 4 bars filing of any suit or initiating any other legal proceeding for a conversion of the religious character of any place of worship, as existing during Independence.

"The Places of Worship Act 1991 is void and unconstitutional for many reasons," the plea said, adding that it offends the right of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs to pray, profess, practice and prorogate religion (Article 25), the petitions said, adding, "It also infringes on their right to manage, maintain and administer the places of worship and pilgrimage (Article 26)."

The petitions further mention, "The Act deprives these communities from owning/acquiring religious properties belonging to deity (misappropriated by other communities) And also takes away the right to take back their places of worship and pilgrimage and the property which belong to deity."

The Act further deprives Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs to take back their places of worship and pilgrimage connected with cultural heritage (Article 29) and it also restricts them to restore the possession of places of worship and pilgrimage but allows Muslims to claim under Section 107, Waqf Act, the petitioners claimed.

"It is respectfully submitted that the Central Government by making impugned provision (Places of Worship Act 1991) in the year of 1991 has created arbitrary irrational retrospective cutoff date, declared that character of places of worship and pilgrimage shall be maintained as it was on August 15, 1947, and no suit or proceeding shall lie in the court in respect of the dispute against encroachment done by barbaric fundamentalist invaders and such proceeding shall stand abated," the PILs stated.

(With ANI inputs)