The Supreme Court on Thursday, December 12, will start hearing a series of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, a law that preserves the religious character of places of worship as they stood on August 15, 1947, the outcome of which could have far-reaching implications for India's secular fabric. A day before the critical hearing, several petitions have been filed at the top court in support of the Act.
Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MP Manoj Jha filed an intervention application stating that the law safeguards the secular ethos of the nation, prevents communal disharmony, and upholds constitutional values such as equality and fraternity. “The 1991 Act was passed by Parliament to ensure peaceful coexistence among all religious communities and to protect the inclusive spirit of the Constitution,” the application stated, adding that revisiting settled issues concerning religious sites could incite discord. He said that the Act is a legislative guarantee to uphold secularism. He warned against rising “sectarian politics” that weaponises religion and polarises communities.
Two prominent mosque committees have also sought to intervene in the case. Varanasi’s Gyanvapi Mosque Committee argued that overturning the Act would obliterate the rule of law and communal harmony. The committee’s application stressed that “rhetorical arguments seeking retribution for actions of ancient rulers cannot form the basis of a constitutional challenge.”
Mathura’s Shahi Eidgah Mosque Committee pointed out the Act’s role in maintaining progress and noted that it has withstood scrutiny for over three decades. It also expressed concern over the ramifications of revisiting historical grievances, stating that such actions would undermine communal harmony. Both committees said that the Act was a deliberate move by Parliament to prevent disputes that could destabilize public peace.
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) also filed an intervention application, terming the law crucial for maintaining communal harmony and protecting the pluralistic ethos of the nation. The party’s politburo, in a statement, noted that “The 2019 Ayodhya judgment upheld the validity of the Act, making it imperative for the judiciary to prevent new litigations targeting places of worship.” The CPI(M) criticized recent legal attempts to challenge the Act as a “backdoor” method to rewrite India’s secular and pluralistic history. It warned of the dangers of sectarian agendas that threaten to disrupt the hard-won harmony achieved by the country’s forefathers.
The Places of Worship Act was enacted in 1991 to ensure that no religious place would be converted from its status as of August 15, 1947, except for the Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi site, which was already under litigation. Petitions challenging the Act argue that it infringes on fundamental rights and limits the judiciary’s ability to address grievances concerning religious sites.
The Supreme Court has constituted a three-judge Special Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Vishwanathan, to adjudicate on the matter