SC tags Owaisi’s plea for Places of Worship Act enforcement with pending cases
SC tags Owaisi’s plea for Places of Worship Act enforcement with pending cases
M.U.H
02/01/202533
The Supreme Court on Thursday tagged All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief and parliamentarian Asaduddin Owaisi’s petition with a series of cases – some challenging the validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, and others advocating for its strict enforcement.
The Act was enacted to preserve the religious character of all places of worship as they stood on August 15, 1947, with the exception of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya due to ongoing litigation at the time.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar directed that Owaisi’s petition be tagged and heard along with the bundle of other cases, which are expected to come up for hearing on February 17.
Owaisi’s petition, filed on December 17, 2024, through advocate Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, seeks strict enforcement of the 1991 Act. It emphasises the need to prevent any alteration of religious sites and ensure the law’s effective implementation.
The court, already handling multiple petitions linked to the Act, including challenges filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, decided to consolidate Owaisi’s plea with these matters.
The Places of Worship Act prohibits altering the religious nature of any place of worship and imposes strict penalties for violations. It is considered a critical safeguard for preserving the secular ethos of the Constitution. However, the law has been at the centre of legal and political debates, with some petitioners arguing it infringes on their fundamental rights.
Hindu petitioners, including BJP leaders and members of erstwhile royal families, have challenged the Act, claiming it unjustly restricts their ability to reclaim religious sites allegedly destroyed during historical invasions. They argue that the law imposes a one-sided restriction on Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, and Sikh communities while exempting others.
Notable challenges include those from Swamy and Upadhyay, who contend that the Act obstructs their right to worship at temples allegedly converted during foreign invasions, and Kumari Krishna Priya of the erstwhile Kashi royal family, who argues the exemption of Ayodhya was discriminatory.
On December 12, a special bench led by CJI Khanna issued a directive barring courts across the country from entertaining fresh suits or ordering surveys to determine the religious character of places of worship. This order was in response to escalating litigation by Hindu groups seeking surveys of mosques, including the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah Masjid in Mathura.
The directive stayed proceedings in approximately 18 such lawsuits, which had sparked communal and political tensions. On the day, the court also granted the Union government four weeks to clarify its stance on the Act, which has been awaited for over two years despite mounting petitions.
Although the Supreme Court admitted petitions challenging the Act in March 2021, the Centre has refrained from filing a definitive response.
Muslim groups, including the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, argue that striking down the 1991 Act would undermine communal harmony and destabilise the country’s social fabric. They maintain that reopening historical disputes risks reigniting fears among minorities and disrupting the secular foundation of the Constitution.
In its 2019 Ayodhya verdict, the Supreme Court upheld the Places of Worship Act as a cornerstone of India’s secular framework. The judgment highlighted the Act’s role in fostering equality and adhering to the “principle of non-retrogression”, which disallows revisiting settled issues.
Owaisi’s plea, seeking to uphold this Act, highlights the legal tug-of-war between preserving secular values and addressing historical grievances.
The Places of Worship Act, enacted by the Congress-led government in 1991, aimed to freeze the status of all religious sites as of August 15, 1947, except for the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site. For decades, the law remained uncontested, facing no significant legal challenge.
The Supreme Court’s 2019 Ayodhya judgment that ruled in favour of the Hindu parties rekindled demands for reclaiming other religious sites, fuelling arguments over the Act’s constitutionality.
