The Supreme Court docket on Thursday tagged All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief and parliamentarian Asaduddin Owaisi’s petition with a sequence of instances – some difficult the validity of the Locations of Worship (Particular Provisions) Act, 1991, and others advocating for its strict enforcement.
The Act was enacted to protect the non secular character of all locations of worship as they stood on August 15, 1947, excluding the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid web site in Ayodhya on account of ongoing litigation on the time.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar directed that Owaisi’s petition be tagged and heard together with the bundle of different instances, that are anticipated to return up for listening to on February 17.
Owaisi’s petition, filed on December 17, 2024, via advocate Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, seeks strict enforcement of the 1991 Act. It emphasises the necessity to forestall any alteration of non secular websites and make sure the legislation’s efficient implementation.
The court docket, already dealing with a number of petitions linked to the Act, together with challenges filed by BJP chief Subramanian Swamy and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, determined to consolidate Owaisi’s plea with these issues.
The Locations of Worship Act prohibits altering the non secular nature of anywhere of worship and imposes strict penalties for violations. It’s thought of a important safeguard for preserving the secular ethos of the Structure. Nevertheless, the legislation has been on the centre of authorized and political debates, with some petitioners arguing it infringes on their elementary rights.
Hindu petitioners, together with BJP leaders and members of erstwhile royal households, have challenged the Act, claiming it unjustly restricts their means to reclaim non secular websites allegedly destroyed throughout historic invasions. They argue that the legislation imposes a one-sided restriction on Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, and Sikh communities whereas exempting others.
Notable challenges embody these from Swamy and Upadhyay, who contend that the Act obstructs their proper to worship at temples allegedly transformed throughout international invasions, and Kumari Krishna Priya of the erstwhile Kashi royal household, who argues the exemption of Ayodhya was discriminatory.
On December 12, a particular bench led by CJI Khanna issued a directive barring courts throughout the nation from entertaining recent fits or ordering surveys to find out the non secular character of locations of worship. This order was in response to escalating litigation by Hindu teams looking for surveys of mosques, together with the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah Masjid in Mathura.
The directive stayed proceedings in roughly 18 such lawsuits, which had sparked communal and political tensions. On the day, the court docket additionally granted the Union authorities 4 weeks to make clear its stance on the Act, which has been awaited for over two years regardless of mounting petitions.
Though the Supreme Court docket admitted petitions difficult the Act in March 2021, the Centre has kept away from submitting a definitive response.
Muslim teams, together with the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, argue that hanging down the 1991 Act would undermine communal concord and destabilise the nation’s social cloth. They preserve that reopening historic disputes dangers reigniting fears amongst minorities and disrupting the secular basis of the Structure.
In its 2019 Ayodhya verdict, the Supreme Court docket upheld the Locations of Worship Act as a cornerstone of India’s secular framework. The judgment highlighted the Act’s function in fostering equality and adhering to the “precept of non-retrogression”, which disallows revisiting settled points.
Owaisi’s plea, looking for to uphold this Act, highlights the authorized tug-of-war between preserving secular values and addressing historic grievances.
The Locations of Worship Act, enacted by the Congress-led authorities in 1991, aimed to freeze the standing of all non secular websites as of August 15, 1947, aside from the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid web site. For many years, the legislation remained uncontested, going through no vital authorized problem.
The Supreme Court docket’s 2019 Ayodhya judgment that dominated in favour of the Hindu events rekindled calls for for reclaiming different non secular websites, fuelling arguments over the Act’s constitutionality.
