The 1991 law mandates that the religious character of a place of worship remain as it was on August 15, 1947
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed fresh petitions challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, stating that notices had not been issued on them and the Centre’s response was still pending. The court scheduled all related petitions for hearing before a three-judge bench in the week beginning April 1.
The 1991 law mandates that the religious character of a place of worship remain as it was on August 15, 1947. During the hearing, petitioners advocating for strict enforcement of the Act raised concerns over the Centre's failure to file its response. Senior advocate Vikas Singh and advocate Nizam Pasha urged the court to give the government one final opportunity to do so.
“Eight hearing dates have passed, yet no counter affidavit has been filed,” Pasha pointed out.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar acknowledged the delay but noted that the newly filed petitions introduced fresh legal grounds. However, it allowed petitioners like Samajwadi Party leader and Kairana MP Iqra Choudhary, whose petitions had not yet been issued notices, to file intervention applications in the ongoing cases.
“The writ petitioners can file an intervention application raising new grounds. The pending writ petitions, on which no notices have been issued, stand dismissed, with liberty to file an application raising additional grounds if necessary,” the bench ruled.
The Chief Justice expressed concern over the increasing number of petitions on the issue, stating, “People keep filing fresh petitions, claiming they have raised new grounds… It will become impossible for us to handle them all.”
The court also indicated that it might not take up previously scheduled petitions — earlier heard by a three-judge bench — on the same day, as it was currently sitting as a two-judge bench.
In a separate development, senior advocate Dushyant Dave supported the bench’s stance, asserting that no fresh petitions should be allowed on the matter.
On December 12, 2024, the Supreme Court had effectively stalled proceedings in around 18 lawsuits filed by various Hindu groups seeking surveys to determine the original religious character of 10 mosques. These include the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi, the Shahi Idgah Mosque in Mathura, and the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal.
Following that order, several new petitions have been filed by AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi, Samajwadi Party leader Iqra Choudhary, and the Congress, demanding strict enforcement of the 1991 law. Meanwhile, the Hindu group Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti has sought to intervene in cases challenging the law’s validity.
Previously, the court was handling six petitions, including one filed by lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay, who is seeking to strike down Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Act, arguing that they deny people the right to seek judicial remedies for reclaiming places of worship.
On the other hand, Muslim groups like Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind have been advocating for strict enforcement of the law to maintain communal harmony and prevent changes to the status of mosques.
The Supreme Court clarified that the key issue at hand is the interpretation of Sections 3 and 4 of the 1991 law. Section 3 prohibits the conversion of places of worship, while Section 4 establishes the religious character of sites and limits court jurisdiction on such matters.
Meanwhile, the Gyanvapi Mosque management committee has opposed multiple petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the law. It argued that these petitions were filed with “mischievous intent” to facilitate legal challenges against protected religious sites, including the Shahi Idgah Mosque in Mathura and the Quwwat-ul-Islam Mosque near Delhi’s Qutub Minar.
With multiple pleas pending, the Supreme Court has signaled that only applications raising entirely new legal issues will be entertained. The matter will now be heard in the first week of April.
