Supreme Court seeks Centre’s stand on Places of Worship Act

The 1991 parliamentary law protects the identity and character of religious places as they were on August 15, 1947

October 12, 2022 08:49 pm | Updated October 13, 2022 01:00 am IST - NEW DELHI

A slew of petitions has been filed in the apex court against the Places of Worship Act, contending it has illegally fixed a retrospective cut-off date (August 15, 1947), illegally barring Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs from approaching courts to “re-claim” their places of worship which were “invaded” and “encroached” upon by “fundamentalist barbaric invaders”. 

A slew of petitions has been filed in the apex court against the Places of Worship Act, contending it has illegally fixed a retrospective cut-off date (August 15, 1947), illegally barring Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs from approaching courts to “re-claim” their places of worship which were “invaded” and “encroached” upon by “fundamentalist barbaric invaders”.  | Photo Credit: The Hindu Photo Library

The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Centre to make its stand clear on whether a Constitution Bench in the Ram Janmabhoomi case has already settled the question of validity of the Places of Worship Act of 1991.

The 1991 parliamentary law protects the identity and character of religious places as they were on August 15, 1947.

The Hindu Explains | What is the debate around the Places of Worship Act all about?

The Ayodhya judgment of the Supreme Court had found that the 1991 Act spoke "to our history and to the future of the nation… In preserving the character of places of public worship, the Parliament has mandated in no uncertain terms that history and its wrongs shall not be used as instruments to oppress the present and the future”.

Watch | What is the Places of Worship Act?

‘Different context’

On Wednesday, when asked by a Bench led by Chief Justice of India U.U. Lalit for his "personal opinion" Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the government, said what was said in the Ayodhya judgment about the 1991 Act would not preclude the court from examining the validity of the statute now.

"That [Ayodhya judgment] was given in a different context and may not cover the issue here," Mr. Mehta gave his opinion.

Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay, said the remarks made in the Ayodhya verdict was merely 'obiter dicta" and did not have the force of law.

Advocates P.B. Suresh, Vipin Nair and Vishnu Shankar Jain, appearing for petitioner Vishwa Bhadra Pujari Purohit Mahasangh, said the validity of the 1991 Act was not in question before the Constitution Bench in the Ayodhya case.

A slew of petitions has been filed in the apex court against the Act, contending it has illegally fixed a retrospective cut-off date (August 15, 1947), illegally barring Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs from approaching courts to "re-claim" their places of worship which were "invaded" and "encroached" upon by "fundamentalist barbaric invaders".

The main objective of these petitions is to set right a "historical wrong".

Key move

The court's readiness to test the law is significant considering the recent happenings in courts in Delhi, Varanasi, Mathura and the Supreme Court which test the protective grip and probe the boundaries of The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991.

Explained | The Gyanvapi Mosque-Kashi Vishwanath dispute and the current case

Recently, a Delhi civil court had referred to the remarks about the 1991 Act in the Ayodhya judgment while dismissing a suit to “restore” alleged Hindu and Jain temples inside the Qutb Minar complex.

“Every endeavour should be made to enforce the objective of The Places of Worship Act… Our country had a rich history and seen challenging times. Nevertheless, history has to be accepted as a whole. Can the good be retained and bad be deleted from our history?” the civil court had asked in November 2021.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.