SC Halts New Suits on Religious Disputes

by The_unmuteenglish

New Delhi, 12 December 2024: The Supreme Court on Thursday directed trial courts across India to halt new cases and refrain from issuing effective or final orders regarding the religious character of existing structures in ongoing litigation. The ruling, which underscores judicial caution in handling sensitive religious issues, applies until the court resolves the validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

“Given that the matter is sub judice, we find it appropriate to direct that no fresh suits shall be registered, and courts handling pending cases must not pass effective or final orders,” a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna stated. Justices P.V. Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan were also part of the bench.

The order impacts several high-profile cases, including disputes over the Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi mosque, Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah in Mathura, Sambhal Jama Masjid, Bhojshala, and Ajmer Sharif. These courts are now restricted from taking significant actions, such as ordering surveys or delivering verdicts, until the Supreme Court completes its review.

“When the Supreme Court is examining the matter, is it fair for lower courts to address it?” the bench queried, emphasizing the need for judicial consistency. It added, “Once the Supreme Court lays down the law, lower courts cannot deviate. That is why proceedings must be paused.”

The court also set a four-week deadline for the Centre and other parties to submit responses. It appointed three nodal counsels: Ejaz Maqbool for those advocating the enforcement of the Act, Kanu Agrawal for the Centre, and Vishnu Jain for petitioners opposing the law.

The 1991 Act, passed during the tenure of Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao, prohibits altering the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947, with the sole exception of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya.

Six petitions, including those from advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay and former MP Subramanian Swamy, challenge provisions of the Act. They argue that it imposes an “arbitrary and irrational retrospective cut-off date” that protects encroachments by “fundamentalist-barbaric invaders and law-breakers.”

Responding to these claims, the Supreme Court in January 2023 sought the Centre’s stance on whether the Act unlawfully denies judicial remedies to reclaim religious sites. The petitioners’ allegations have fueled debates, especially since Hindu groups are seeking to reclaim several mosques and dargahs built over pre-existing temples.

Politicians and organizations have intervened to defend the Act. CPI(M) leader Prakash Karat and RJD MP Manoj Jha argued that overturning the law could disrupt India’s secular and communal fabric. “Tinkering with the Act would harm India’s harmony,” Karat warned, while Jha described the legislation as “a reflection of a secular state’s obligations.”

Other political figures, including NCP MLA Jitendra Satish Awhad and leaders of the Indian Union Muslim League, have also sought to be heard. Their petitions emphasize the law’s importance in preserving secularism.

In June 2022, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind moved the court to dismiss challenges to the Act, cautioning that invalidating it could trigger widespread litigation against mosques across the country.

Similarly, the Gyanvapi mosque management committee opposed petitions against the Act, stating that revisiting historical grievances could undermine secularism and the principle of non-retrogression embedded in the legislation.

The Supreme Court’s examination of the Act comes at a time of heightened attention to the balance between historical grievances and the constitutional commitment to secularism.

Related Articles