Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind Moves Supreme Court Against Pleas Challenging Places Of Worship Act, 1991

Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has approached the Supreme Court, urging it not to entertain a petition challenging the validity of the certain provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

The organisation sought to be impleaded in the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay challenging the Constitutional validity of the Act. It said entertaining the plea against the Act will open floodgates of litigations against countless mosques across India.

The organisation, in its application, has said, “There is a list of numerous mosques which is doing the rounds on social media, alleging that the mosques were built allegedly by destroying Hindu temples. Needless to say, that if the present petition is entertained, it will open floodgates of litigation against countless mosques in the country and the religious divide from which the country is recovering in the aftermath of the Ayodhya dispute will only be widened.”

It said the Act was intrinsically related to the obligations of a secular State and reflected the commitment of India to the equality of all religions.

The intervention application further said: “This court has categorically held that the law cannot be used as a device to reach back in time and provide a legal remedy to every person who disagrees with the course which history has taken and that the courts of today cannot take cognisance of historical rights and wrongs unless it is shown that their legal consequences are enforceable in the present.”

The Supreme Court had, in March 2021, asked the centre to respond to Upadhyay’s petition challenging the validity of certain provisions of the 1991 Act, which prohibited the filing of a lawsuit to reclaim a place of worship or seek a change in its character from what prevailed on 15 August 1947.

Recently, several petitions were filed challenging the constitutional validity of certain sections of the Act, saying the Act violates the principles of secularism.

They have challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991, which it said offends Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29 and violates the principles of secularism and rule of law, which is an integral part of Preamble and the basic structure of the Constitution.

The pleas before the top court said that Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Act have taken away the right to approach the Court and thus right to judicial remedy has been closed.

Section 3 of the Act bars the conversion of places of worship. It states:

Section 4 bars filing of any suit or initiating any other legal proceeding for a conversion of the religious character of any place of worship, as existing on 15 August 1947.

The Places of Worship Act 1991 is void and unconstitutional for many reasons, the plea said, adding that it offends the right of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs to pray, profess and practice religion (Article 25). The Act infringes on rights of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs to manage maintain and administer the places of worship and pilgrimage (Article 26), the petition said.

The Act deprives Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs from owning/acquiring religious properties belonging to deity (misappropriated by other communities). It also takes away right of judicial remedy of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs to take back their places of worship and pilgrimage and the property which belongs to deity, stated the pleas.

Also Read: A Look At The Places Of Worship Act, 1991, In Light Of Gyanvapi Findings