The Allahabad High Court set March 5 for hearing the case related to the Shahi Idgah dispute. The case involves a legal battle over the ownership of the site. The Muslim side had filed an application to amend its petition. The court will now consider the request and proceed with the hearing.
Today, On 10th January, The Supreme Court ruled against allowing puja at the well located within Sambhal’s Jama Masjid amid an ongoing temple-mosque dispute. The court emphasized maintaining the status quo while addressing the sensitive matter. It has also issued a notice to the Uttar Pradesh government, seeking its response on the issue. The case highlights the judicial approach to balancing religious sentiments and legal considerations.
![[BREAKING] Hindu Group Moves Supreme Court to Challenge 1991 Places of Worship Law](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Places-of-worship-act.webp?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
NEW DELHI: Today(6th Jan): A Hindu group, the Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti, has approached the Supreme Court to challenge the constitutional validity of the 1991 Places of Worship Act, claiming it infringes on fundamental rights and prevents communities from reclaiming religious sites. The law maintains the status quo of religious places since 1947, excluding disputes related to the Babri Masjid.
The Congress and Samajwadi Party are filing separate Supreme Court petitions to ensure the effective implementation of the Places of Worship Act, 1991, amidst existing challenges to its validity. The Act preserves the religious character of places as of August 15, 1947, except the Ayodhya dispute. Both parties emphasize its importance for communal harmony, citing its recognition in the 2019 Ayodhya verdict as part of the Constitution’s “basic structure.” The Congress has reaffirmed its commitment to the Act amid internal and external pressures, while the SP is being assisted by senior advocate Kapil Sibal in drafting its plea.
In Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, three broken idols, including one of Lord Ganesh, were discovered while excavating a well near a temple that had been closed for 46 years. Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain supports the significance of Sambhal as a pilgrimage site, while tensions arise following recent violence and complaints regarding threats related to the mosque-temple dispute.
The Supreme Court of India directed trial courts nationwide to refrain from passing any effective orders or conducting surveys concerning existing religious structures in cases disputing their religious character. A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan passed the interim direction while hearing a batch of petitions challenging provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991.
The Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, has paused new lawsuits while reviewing challenges to the Places of Worship Act. Advocate Hari Shankar Jain advocates restoring demolished Hindu temples, claiming the ruling benefits Hindus. The court will evaluate ongoing cases concerning religious structures in due course.
Today, On 12th December, Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna will hear petitions contesting the Places of Worship Act, which preserves the status of religious sites as of August 15, 1947. Supporters argue it upholds secularism and prevents communal tensions, while challengers claim it violates religious rights and impedes judicial remedies for various faiths.
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court is set to hear a batch of pleas on December 12 challenging the validity of the Places of Worship Act, which mandates maintaining the status quo of all places of worship as existed on August 15, 1947. The Chief Justice of India (CJI), Sanjiv Khanna, has constituted a special three-judge bench–comprising himself, Justice Sanjay Kumar, and Justice KV Vishwanathan–to hear the case, which has been pending before the court since 2020.
Today, On 29th November, Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna requested a postponement of the Shahi Jama Masjid survey hearing, highlighting the need for careful judicial handling of sensitive matters. The Supreme Court instructed the mosque’s management to approach the High Court against a survey order. Violence erupted during a prior survey, raising communal harmony concerns.