SC refuses to entertain petition challenging validity of Places of Worship Act, 1991-OxBig News Network

The Supreme Court on Tuesday turned down a law student’s petition challenging the validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 — which mandates maintaining the religious character of a place as it existed on August 15, 1947 — saying it didn’t want to entertain multiple petitions on the same issue.

“This is the same plea. What’s the difference? Stop filing petitions and applications,” a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna said, dismissing the petition.

The Bench, however, gave liberty to petitioner Nitin Upadhyay to file an application in the already pending petitions challenging the validity of the 1991 Act.

Contending that there’s a subtle difference between the earlier petitions and the present one, the petitioner’s counsel requested the Bench to tag it with the pending petitions for hearing.

“We are not inclined to interfere in the present petition under Article 32 of the Constitution,” the Bench said, giving him liberty to file an application in the pending matter.

Enacted by Parliament during the PV Narasimha Rao government in the backdrop of the Ayodhya Ram Mandir agitation, this Act freezes the religious character of a place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947, except that of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid, which was demolished by karsevaks on December 6, 1992. Following a Supreme Court verdict, a Ram temple has been constructed at Ayodhya.

However, with regard to other disputed religious sites, including the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah at Mathura and Kashi Vishwanath–Gyanvapi Mosque disputes, the Act continues to operate as a bar against any possible change in the character of the religious structures. Any place of worship, which is an ancient and historical monument or an archaeological site covered by the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, is exempted from the purview of the Act.

The top court had on December 12, 2024 restrained trial courts across India from registering fresh suits and ordering surveys or passing any effective and final orders with regard to religious character of existing religious structures in already pending suits.

The stay order meant that in pending suits regarding Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi mosque dispute, Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute at Mathura, Sambhal Jama Masjid, Bhojshala and Ajmer Sharif dargah disputes, courts cannot pass any effective or final orders, including those for surveys.

The Bench had, however, refused to stay the proceedings in 18 suits already pending with regard to 10 places of worship/mosques/dargahs. It had clarified that it was examining the validity as well as ambit of the 1991 law.

Petitioner Nitin Upadhyay had sought a direction allowing courts to pass appropriate orders to ascertain the original religious character of a place of worship. It has challenged section 4(2) of the Act that barred proceedings to change the religious character, besides prohibiting filing of fresh cases for the same.

“The Centre has transgressed its legislative power in barring the judicial remedy, which is a basic feature of the Constitution. It is well established that the right to judicial remedy by filing suit in a competent court, cannot be barred and the power of courts cannot be abridged and such denial has been held to be violative of basic features of the Constitution, beyond legislative power,” Upadhyay submitted.

As various political parties and leaders filed fresh petitions in a case related to validity of the Act, the top court had on February 17 taken exception to it, saying there was a limit to it.