'No Further Suits To Be Registered Under Places Of Worship Act Till...': Supreme Court On Mandir-Masjid Cases

The Supreme Court has asked the Centre to file affidavit in a batch of petitions challenging certain provisions of Places of Worship (Special Provision) Act, 1991.

Supreme Court has made a major ruling on Places Of Worship Act.

Source : PTI

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that no further suits can be registered in the country till the court hears and disposes off the petitions challenging the Places of Worship Act.

 

A Special Bench of the apex court comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Viswanathan made the observation while hearing a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

 

The court also directed trial courts across the country to not pass any effective orders or surveys against existing religious structures in suits filed disputing the religious character of such structures. 

 

 

"As the matter is sub-judice before this court we deem it fit to direct that no fresh suits shall be registered or proceedings be ordered. In the pending suits, courts would not pass any effective order or final orders. When a matter is pending before us, is it just and fair for any other court to examine it. We are on vires as well as ambit of the act," the apex court stated, according to Bar and Bench.

 

The apex court bench further said that no new suits can be registered over such claims. It also asked the Centre to file affidavit in a batch of petitions challenging certain provisions of Places of Worship Act, that prohibit the filing of a lawsuit to reclaim a place of worship or seek a change in its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947.

 

The matter was being heard in the backdrop of several suits filed in various courts, including those related to the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi, Shahi Idgah Mosque in Mathura and Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, claiming these were built after destroying ancient temples and seeking permission to allow the Hindus to offer prayers there.

 

The Muslim side, in most of these cases, has cited the 1991 law to argue that such suits are not maintainable. As many as six petitions, including those filed by former Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy, have been filed against the provisions of the 1991 law.

 

Swamy wanted the apex court to read down certain provisions to enable Hindus to stake claim over the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi and Shahi Idgah Mosque in Mathura, while Ashwini Upadhyay claimed the entire statute was unconstitutional and no question of reading down arises.