The Supreme Court on Thursday barred trial courts from passing interim or final orders, including survey directions, in pending lawsuits concerning the religious character of places of worship, Live Law reported. It also said that no new suits can be registered in any court across the country until further orders.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Viswanathan issued the interim order while hearing a clutch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the 1991 Places of Worship Special Provisions Act.
The Act does not allow any changes to the religious character of a place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947.
“As the matter is sub-judice before this court, we deem it appropriate to direct that while suits may be filed, no suits would be registered and proceedings undertaken till further orders of this court,” the bench said on Thursday. “We also direct that in the pending suits, the courts would not pass any effective interim orders or final orders, including orders of survey till the next date of hearing.”
The order comes amid growing concerns about the increasing number of lawsuits by Hindu parties claiming ownership of mosques and dargahs.
In November, violence erupted between Hindu and Muslim groups after a trial court ordered a survey of the 16th-century Jama Masjid in Uttar Pradesh’s Sambhal. Five persons were killed in the violence.
The Supreme Court’s directive applies to similar cases including the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi, the Shahi Eidgah mosque in Mathura and the Ajmer Sharif dargah in Rajasthan where Hindu claimants have argued that these structures were built atop ancient Hindu temples.
The court has not, however, stayed the ongoing proceedings in these lawsuits. The Muslim parties have said that these cases are not maintainable as per the Places of Worship Act.
During the hearing, Justice Viswanathan observed: “Civil courts can’t run a race with the Supreme Court. That is why there has to be a stay. You have a judgment of five judges.”
The court instructed the Union government to file a counter-affidavit within four weeks addressing the constitutional challenges to the 1991 Act. The government was asked to upload the affidavit on a publicly accessible website, which has not yet been done despite several extensions being granted by the court in previous hearings.
There are presently 18 suits pending in courts across the country concerning 10 mosques and shrines.
Several political parties, including the Communist Party of India (Marxist), Indian Union Muslim League, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, the Nationalist Congress Party (Sharadchandra Pawar) and the Rashtriya Janata Dal have filed intervention petitions seeking to protect the 1991 Act.
The petitions challenging the Act were originally spearheaded by Bharatiya Janata Party leader Ashwini Upadhyay, who filed a petition in 2020 arguing that the law protects the “illegal acts of invaders” by barring legal remedies for Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs, reported Bar and Bench.
In June 2022, the Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind moved the Court to oppose Upadhyay’s petition, arguing that it sought to target Islamic places of worship.
The Places of Worship Act was introduced during the height of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, which eventually led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya in December 1992.
The law was designed to protect the religious status of places of worship as it stood on August 15, 1947. It bars courts from entertaining suits seeking to alter the status of these sites. The only exception made was for the Ram Janmabhoomi site in Ayodhya, where the Supreme Court’s 2019 verdict awarded the land to the Hindu deity Ram.
The bench appointed three nodal counsels to facilitate the case: Kanu Agarwal for the Union government, Vishnu Shankar Jain for the petitioners and Ejaz Maqbool for parties supporting the 1991 Act.
The case is expected to be heard next after the Centre has filed its counter-affidavit.
Also read:
- ‘Ayodhya happened, now Sambhal’s turn’: How a court order sparked a deadly dispute over a mosque
- How the Allahabad HC order on Places of Worship Act may open a Pandora’s box
- How SC’s evasion on Places of Worship Act challenge is powering new Hindutva claims on mosques
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!