The Supreme Court Today (Feb 17) expressed concern over excessive intervention applications in the Places of Worship Act, 1991 case, delaying the hearing to April. “Too many petitions filed. There is a limit to interventions being filed.”
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Monday raised concerns about the large number of intervention applications being filed in the case that challenges the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
A Bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar expressed that there should be some restrictions on such intervention applications.
“We will not take up the Places of Worship Act matter today. It is a three-judge Bench matter. Too many petitions filed. List sometime in March-April. There is a limit to interventions being filed,”
-CJI Khanna.
Several political parties and leaders have submitted intervention applications in this case, including the Congress Party, CPI(ML), Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind, and All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen (AIMIM) leader Asaduddin Owaisi.
These parties and leaders have stood in favor of the 1991 Act and have opposed the petitions that challenge its validity.
“Too many petitions filed. There is a limit to interventions being filed.”:
-Supreme Court.
Expressing displeasure over several fresh pleas, the Supreme Court on Monday said a three-judge bench will hear in April the only post-notice pending petitions related to validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 which mandates the religious character of a place to be maintained as it existed on August 15, 1947.
The top court, however, granted liberty to the petitioners like Samajwadi Party leader and Kairana MP Iqra Choudhary, who have filed the pleas recently and notices have not been issued on them, to file applications for intervention in pending ones by citing new legal grounds.
Dismissing fresh petitions, on which notices were not issued yet, bench said,
“The writ petitioners can file an (intervention) application raising new grounds.”
This case has attracted nationwide attention as it involves the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which was enacted to maintain the religious character of places of worship as they were on August 15, 1947. The Act prohibits changing the religious identity of any place of worship, except for the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, which was already pending in court at the time.
The Supreme Court’s decision to put a cap on intervention applications reflects its concern about the increasing number of petitions, which could potentially delay the case.
The matter is now set to be heard in April by a 3-judge Bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, along with Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan.
Why the Delay?
During today’s proceedings, the CJI bench indicated that due to the large number of petitions involved, the matter could not be taken up immediately.
The court emphasized that a structured approach was required for framing the key legal questions before moving forward with substantive hearings.
“Given the large number of petitions, we will have to schedule a hearing in March, which will also include the framing of questions.”
-the court reportedly stated.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court to Hear Crucial Pleas on Places of Worship Act Today (Feb 17)
Background on the Case
The Places of Worship Act, 1991, enacted during the tenure of Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao, prohibits the conversion of religious places of worship from their status as of August 15, 1947.
The law seeks to uphold the secular character of India by maintaining the religious identity of places of worship, with an exception carved out for the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute.
Over the years, several petitions have been filed challenging the constitutional validity of the Act, arguing that it violates fundamental rights, including the right to equality (Article 14) and freedom of religion (Article 25).
Some petitioners also contend that the law restricts the rights of Hindus to reclaim religious sites that were allegedly altered or encroached upon before 1947.
ALSO READ: CJI Sanjiv Khanna To Take Up Today (Dec 12) Validity of Places of Worship Act
The Act prevents the conversion of any place of worship and ensures that religious sites maintain their original character as they were on August 15, 1947.
However, the law does not apply to the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute in Ayodhya.
Several petitions have challenged the validity of certain provisions of the 1991 law. Some parties argue that the Act violates fundamental rights, while others demand its strict enforcement to maintain religious harmony.
On January 2, the Supreme Court decided to examine a petition by AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, who sought proper enforcement of the Places of Worship Act. Additionally, on December 12, a bench led by the Chief Justice ordered that no new lawsuits regarding religious sites should be entertained by any court, nor should any existing court cases issue interim or final orders until the Supreme Court delivers its ruling.
ALSO READ: CJI Khanna Hearing On Pleas Challenging Places Of Worship Act Today (Dec 5)
“As the matter is sub judice before this court, we deem it appropriate to direct that, though fresh suits may be filed, no suits would be registered and no proceedings shall be undertaken therein till further orders of this court,”
-the bench ruled.
This decision put a hold on around 18 lawsuits filed by various Hindu groups. These lawsuits sought permission to survey religious sites, including:
- Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi
- Shahi Idgah Masjid in Mathura
- Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal (where four people lost their lives in recent clashes)
The main issue before the Supreme Court revolves around Sections 3 and 4 of the 1991 Act:
- Section 3: Prohibits the conversion of religious sites.
- Section 4: Declares the religious character of places of worship and restricts courts from intervening.
There are cross petitions regarding the implementation of the law:
- Hindu groups argue that several mosques were originally temples destroyed by past invaders and should be restored.
- Muslim organizations, including the Gyanvapi Mosque Committee, oppose these claims and want the Supreme Court to uphold the 1991 law.
The mosque committee pointed out that such disputes have been raised over multiple mosques and shrines, including:
- Shahi Idgah Masjid in Mathura
- Quwwat-ul-Islam Masjid near Qutub Minar in Delhi
- Kamal Maula Mosque in Madhya Pradesh
With communal harmony and constitutional questions at stake, the Supreme Court’s decision on this matter is expected to have a significant impact across the country.
What’s Next?
With the Supreme Court now likely to take up the matter in March, the next phase of the case will involve defining the key legal issues to be addressed. These could include:
- Whether the Act violates fundamental rights under the Constitution.
- Whether the Act can be challenged on historical or religious grounds.
- The scope of judicial review regarding the Act’s provisions.
The case has significant political and religious implications, with various religious groups, historians, and legal experts weighing in on its impact.
As the matter now moves toward a structured hearing in March, all eyes will be on the Supreme Court’s approach to this sensitive and complex issue.
Stay tuned for further updates on this developing story.
Case Title:
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors. & other connected matters [W.P.(C) No. 001246 /2020] and connected cases.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on CJI Sanjeev Khanna
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
