The Supreme Court on Thursday barred civil courts across the country from registering fresh suits challenging the ownership and title of any place of worship, and from ordering surveys of disputed religious places until further orders.
“As the matter is sub judice…, we deem it appropriate to direct that no fresh suits may be filed nor registered or proceedings be ordered till further orders of this court… We also direct that in 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 Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna said.
Case before the court
The Bench, also comprising Justices P V Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan, was hearing petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship Act, 1991.
The law, brought in the wake of the Ayodhya movement, prohibits conversion of any place of worship and provides for the maintenance of the religious character of places of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947.
Only the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute was kept out of the purview of the law since the case was already sub judice.
What the order impacts
The order applies to both civil suits that are already pending (there are several; below) and to those that may be filed in the future.
The order bars the “registration” of cases by civil courts. Consequently, they also cannot order a survey, or seek a report from the Archeological Survey of India (ASI), as they have done in several recent instances.
All these civil cases have raised questions on the title of mosques, arguing that they were built on Hindu religious structures that were razed by medieval rulers.
The SC also observed that court orders in these civil suits could be challenged on the grounds that they violate larger constitutional principles of secularism and the rule of law, irrespective of the Places of Worship Act.
Challenge to the 1991 Act
Meanwhile, the SC will have to hear the constitutional challenge to the 1991 Act. These petitions have been pending since 2020. It remains to be seen if the Centre will defend the law or argue against it.
The petitioners have challenged the law on two main grounds. First, that it takes away the power of judicial review by abating claims that existed at the time of passing the law and prohibiting fresh claims in courts. Second, that it is arbitrary in retrospectively picking August 15, 1947 as the cut-off date for determining the religious character of a place of worship.
In 2019, in the five-judge Constitution Bench ruling in the Ayodhya case, the SC had referred to the 1991 law as forming a part of the “basic structure of the Constitution”.
While the 1991 law was not directly under challenge in that case, the SC observations could still be relevant in determining the constitutional validity of the law.
Places of Worship Act: A timeline
1991: Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act enacted; said “religious character” of a place of worship will remain as it was on August 15, 1947. Only exception: “Ram Janma Bhumi-Babri Masjid”. The Ayodhya agitation was raging at the time; Babri Masjid was still standing.
Oct 2020: First petition filed challenging the Act; five more filed subsequently — on grounds of arbitrariness on date, and the fact that it takes away judicial review.
Aug 2021: Five women filed suit in Varanasi seeking permission to pray at the Gyanvapi mosque.
May 2022: After case reached SC, then CJI D Y Chandrachud orally observed that a survey “may not necessarily fall foul” of the Places of Worship Act.
2022-2024: At least six suits were filed claiming past existence of a Hindu temple at the site of a mosque or dargah. Surveys were ordered in three of these cases.
Dec 2024: SC barred further survey orders, further “effective” orders, and the registering of fresh suits.— AJOY SINHA KARPURAM
++++++
PENDING SUITS ON MOSQUE-TEMPLE DISPUTES
Shahi Jama Masjid, Sambhal
Case: Suit filed on November 19 claiming mosque was built on ruins of an ancient temple that was dedicated to Lord Kalki.
Status: Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sambhal ordered survey, which triggered violence on November 24, in which several people were killed. On November 29, SC asked court not to proceed with suit for now.
Atala Mosque, Jaunpur
Case: Suit filed in May 2024 seeking declaration that Atala Devi temple existed at site; possession of property; restraining order against non-Hindus.
Status: Survey ordered; Jaunpur court was to hear plea for security to surveyors on December 16. Petition filed at Allahabad HC challenging registration of suit.
Kamal Moula Mosque, Bhojshala Complex, Dhar
Case: Petition filed before MP HC in 2022 challenging 2003 ASI order allowing Muslims to offer namaz on Fridays.
Status: In March 2024, HC sought “scientific survey”. In April, SC disallowed digging that changes character of premises.
Gyanvapi Mosque, Varanasi
Case: Suit filed on behalf of Adi Vishweshwar in 1991. In 2021 five Hindu women sought permission to worship there.
Status: Sessions Judge ordered ASI survey; upheld maintainability of 2021 suit in 2023. Maintainability of 1991 suit was also upheld in 2022.
Shamsi Jama Masjid, Budaun
Case: Suit filed in 2022 by Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha claiming temple to Neelkanth Mahadev stood at site; seeking permission to pray.
Status: Fast-track court in Budaun is currently hearing arguments on maintainability of the suit.
Quwwat-ul-Islam Mosque, Delhi
Case: In 2020, suit filed seeking restoration of Hindu and Jain deities inside mosque in Qutub Minar complex.
Status: Civil Judge rejected suit in 2021 stating it was barred by provisions of Places of Worship Act, 1991. Challenge to this order is pending.
Shahi Idgah Mosque, Mathura
Case: Several suits filed since 2020 seeking removal of mosque; also question validity of 1968 “agreement” that allowed mosque and a new temple to co-exist.
Status: In August 2024, Allahabad HC rejected challenge to maintainability of suits. Mosque committee has gone to SC.
Teele Wali Masjid, Lucknow
Case: In 2013, suit filed by Hindus seeking survey of mosque allegedly built after Aurangzeb demolished temple.
Status: Maintainability of suit pending before Allahabad HC; suit seeking injunction to allow Hindu devotees to pray pending before Civil Judge.
Ajmer Sharif Dargah, Ajmer
Case: Suit filed in September 2024 claiming there is evidence of a temple to Lord Shiva at the site.
Status: Civil Judge issued notices to Union Ministry of Minority Affairs, ASI, and the Ajmer Dargah Committee on November 27.
Malali Juma Masjid, Mangaluru
Case: Suit filed in 2022 by VHP claiming “temple like” structure was found beneath the mosque during renovation; requested survey of premises.
Status: On January 31, 2024 Karnataka HC ordered trial court to first decide on maintainability of suit.
Why should you buy our Subscription?
You want to be the smartest in the room.
You want access to our award-winning journalism.
You don’t want to be misled and misinformed.
Choose your subscription package
