The Supreme Court today (February 17) deferred the hearing of the pleas concerning the Places of Worship Act 1991 to April. The bench of CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar directed that the matter be listed for hearing in the week commencing April 1. Notably, the matter was earlier heard by a three-judge bench comprising CJI Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV...
The Supreme Court today (February 17) deferred the hearing of the pleas concerning the Places of Worship Act 1991 to April.
The bench of CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar directed that the matter be listed for hearing in the week commencing April 1. Notably, the matter was earlier heard by a three-judge bench comprising CJI Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Viswanathan.
The bench is seized of one set of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991 and another set seeking the strict enforcement of the Act.
Since the Chief's Court was sitting in a two-judge combination today, the matter was adjourned. In the morning session, when the Counsels asked if new interventions could be allowed, the CJI replied: "There is a limit to which it can be filed, there's a number of petitions coming, we will see."
Later on, the bench also took note of the multiple intervention applications being filed in the main matter and also similar writ petitions either challenging the impugned Act or seeking implementation of the Act.
Considering the same, the bench directed that any pending writ petitions in which no notice has been issued would stand as dismissed. However, liberty was granted to such writ petitioners to file applications raising additional grounds in the ongoing matter itself.
The bench was also informed that no counter affidavit has been filed yet by the Union in the main matter.
Sr Advocate Mr Rakesh Dwivedi appeared for main petioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay. Sr Advocates Dushyant Dave, Vikas Singh and Advocate Nizam Pasha also appeared for other parties.
What Is The Challenge About? And The Key Developments
The lead petition (Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India) was filed in 2020 in which the Court issued notice to the Union Government in March 2021. Later, few other similar petitions were also filed challenging the statute which seeks to preserve the status quo with respect to religious structures as they stood on August 15, 1947, and prohibits legal proceedings seeking their conversion.
In 2022, Islamic clerics body Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind filed a petition seeking the strict implementation of the Act.
Notably, intervention applications in the matter have also been filed by the Gyanvapi Mosque Managing Committee, Maharashtra MLA [NCP (SP)] Dr. Jitendra Satish Awhad, Communist Party of India (Marxist) (represented by Mr. Prakash Karat, Member Politburo) , Mathura Shahi Idgah Masjid Committee and Manoj Jha, Member of Rajya Sabha belonging to RJD.
A writ petition has also been filed by Samajwadi Party leader and Member of Parliament, Iqra Choudhary seeking stricter implementation of the Act.
S.4 of the 1991 Act declares that the religious character of a place of worship existing on the 15th day of August 1947 shall continue to be the same as it existed on that day. It further states that any place of worship, which is an ancient and historical monument or an archaeological site or remains covered by the 1958 Act, will not be covered under the S.4 protection.
The Union Government is yet to file its counter-affidavit in the matter, despite the several time extensions given by the Supreme Court. On July 11, 2023, the Court asked the Union to file the counter by October 31, 2023.
Notably, the bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan on December 12 passed a significant order halting fresh suits and survey orders against religious places.
The Court also ordered that in pending suits (such as those concerning Gyanvapi mosque, Mathura Shahi Idgah, Sambhal Jama Masjid etc.), the Courts should not pass effective interim or final orders, including orders for survey. The interim order was passed while hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 and also a petition seeking the implementation of the Act.
Case : Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors. & other connected matters [W.P.(C) No. 001246 /2020] and connected cases.