The Supreme Court will hear a plea challenging an order by a court in Varanasi, which allow taking a survey, videography and pictures of Gyanvapi Mosque complex.
The video survey of the complex was complete on 16th May 2022 where the Hindu side claim “victory” as they found a ‘shivling’ inside the well.
The Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masjid, which had file the petition, has contend that the Varanasi court order, which was upheld by the Allahabad High Court, is “clearly interdicted” by the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
What is the Places of Worship Act?
The Act, which has in force since 11th July, 1991, prohibits conversion of places of worship, and maintains “the religious character of any place of worship as it exist on the 15th August, 1947 and for matters connect therewith or incidental thereto”.
Section 3 of the Act prohibits any conversion of places of worship.
Act Says :
“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,”.
Section 2 states if any appeal or other proceeding in regards with the conversion of religious character of any place of worship existing on 15th August, 1947, pending before any court, tribunal or other authority “shall abate.
Any legal proceedings pending on the commencement of the Act “shall be dispose of”.
Section 4 (1) says :
“The religious character of a place of worship existing on the 15th day of August, 1947 shall continue to be the same as it existed on that day”.
Section 5 says the Act does not apply to Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case.
“Nothing contain in this Act shall apply to the place or place of worship commonly known as Ram Janma Bhumi-Babri Masjid situate in Ayodhya in the State of Uttar Pradesh and to any suit, appeal or other proceeding relating to the said place or place of worship,”.
The Supreme Court bench, while delivering the verdict in 2019, said :
“In providing a guarantee for the preservation of the religious character of places of public worship as they existed on 15 August 1947 and against the conversion of places of public worship, Parliament determine that independence from colonial rule furnishes a constitutional basis for healing the injustices of the past by providing the confidence to every religious community that their places of worship will be preserve and that their character will not be alter.”
“The Places of Worship Act imposes a non-derogable obligation towards enforcing our commitment to secularism under the Indian Constitution. The law is hence a legislative instrument designed to protect the secular features of the Indian polity, which is one of the basic features of the Constitution…”
How was the Places of Worship Act Pass?
Home minister in the PV Narasimha Rao Cabinet, Shankarrao Bhavrao Chavan, introduce the Bill to prevent communal flare-ups in the country amidst the Ram Janmabhoomi movement was gathering steam.
BJP leader LK Advani’s Rath Yatra receive massive support and he was later arrest in Bihar.
Kar Sevaks were shot in Uttar Pradesh under the Mulayam Singh government.
As reported by The Indian Express, BJP had oppose the Bill. Former MP Uma Bharti had raise the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque dispute, and said :
“Was not the intention of Aurangzeb behind leaving remnants of the temple (he destroye) at the site of a mosque, to keep reminding Hindus of their historical fate and to remind coming generations of Muslims of their past glory and power?”
.
How Many Times Have the Places of Worship Act Challenged?
BJP leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay had challenge the Act in 2021, saying that the law was the breach of principles of secularism laid in the Constitution.
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Said :
“The Centre has bar remedies against illegal encroachment on places of worship and pilgrimages and now Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs cannot file a suit or approach a high court under Article 226. Therefore, they won’t be able to restore their places of worship and pilgrimage including temple endowments in the spirit of Articles 25-26 and the illegal barbarian acts of invaders will continue in perpetuity,”.
The petition is related to a legal battle in a trial court over “reclaiming the birthplace of Lord Krishna in Mathura”, which was affect by provisions of the 1991 Act.
Another petition challenging the Act was file by Vishwa Bhadra Pujari Purohit Mahasangh, which is pending in the Supreme Court.
