Places of Worship Act

In News

• The legal battle over the validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991 is gaining steam in the Supreme Court (SC).

About 

• Several petitions have been filed in the top court questioning the law’s role in perpetuating the crimes of the barbaric invaders who built mosques after destroying temples centuries ago. 
• The Muslim bodies, such as the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, have countered that a dent in the 1991 Act would be the first blow to the secular fabric.

Cases 

• Ayodhya verdict:
  • The Muslim body stressed that the Ayodhya verdict, which upheld the Places of Worship Act, had noted that historical wrongs cannot be remedied by people taking the law in their own hands.
  • In the Ayodhya judgement, the court had 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. 
  • The Supreme Court cannot entertain claims that arise from actions of the Mughal rulers against Hindu places of worship in a court of law today.
• Gyanvapi case:
  • The court’s recent oral observations in the Gyanvapi case has not helped. The court had not intervened in the survey of the Gyanvapi mosque premises and said that a mere ascertainment of the religious character of a place is not barred by the 1991 Act. 

Key Provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act

• It underlines the need to protect the liberty of faith and worship.
• It was passed in 1991 by the P V Narasimha Rao-led Congress government.
• Objective:
  • To provide for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship.
  • To prohibit conversion of any place of worship.
  • To curb communal tension.
• Major Provisions:
  • Section 3 of the Act: It bars the conversion, in full or part, of a place of worship of any religious denomination into a place of worship of a different religious denomination, or even a different segment of the same religious denomination.
  • Section 4(1): It declares that the religious character of a place of worship shall continue to be the same as it existed on August 15, 1947. 
  • Section 4(2): Any suit or legal proceeding with respect to the conversion of the religious character of any place of worship existing on August 15, 1947, pending before any court, shall abate — and no fresh suit or legal proceedings shall be instituted.
  • Section 5: The Act shall not apply to the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case, and to any suit, appeal or proceeding relating to it.
  • Section 6: It prescribes a punishment of maximum three-years imprisonment along with a fine for contravening the provisions of the Act
• Exemptions:
  • Ram Janma Bhumi Babri Masjid
    • Under Section 5 of the Act, it does not apply to Ram Janma Bhumi Babri Masjid.
    • Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to Ram Janma Bhumi-Babri Masjid situated in Ayodhya (Uttar Pradesh) and to any suit, appeal or other proceeding relating to it.
  • Any place of worship that is an ancient and historical monument or an archaeological site, or is covered by the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
  • Any dispute that has been settled by the parties or conversion of any place that took place by acquiescence before the Act commenced.
  • A suit that has been finally settled or disposed of.
• Challenging the Law: The law has been challenged on the ground that:
  • It bars judicial review, which is a basic feature of the Constitution, 
  • It imposes an arbitrary irrational retrospective cutoff date
  • It abridges the right to religion of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs.

Supreme Court’s (SC) views on Act

• In the 2019 Ayodhya verdict, the SC held that the Act manifests the secular values of the Constitution and strictly prohibits retrogression.
• It provides confidence to every religious community that their places of worship will be preserved and that their character will not be altered.
• The law addresses itself to the State as much as to every citizen of the nation and its norms bind those who govern the affairs of the nation at every level.
• Those norms implement the Fundamental Duties under Article 51A and are hence positive mandates to every citizen as well.
• Through it, the State-enforced a constitutional commitment and operationalized its constitutional obligations to uphold the equality of all religions and secularism which is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
• In agreeing to examine the law, SC has opened the doors for litigation in various places of worship across the country.

Source: TH