The Supreme Court has constituted a three-judge bench to hear multiple Public Interest Litigations (PILs) challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan, is scheduled to convene on December 12 at 3:30 PM to address the contentious provisions, particularly Sections 2, 3, and 4.
The law prohibits the filing of lawsuits to reclaim places of worship or alter their religious character as of August 15, 1947.
Among the petitioners is Ashwini Upadhyay, who argues that the provisions of the Act strip individuals and religious groups of their right to judicial remedy. He has requested the court to set aside these sections entirely.
The case arises amidst several high-profile disputes concerning places of worship, such as the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi, Shahi Idgah Mosque in Mathura, and Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal.
Petitioners claim these sites were constructed after the destruction of ancient temples, seeking permission to conduct Hindu prayers. The Muslim parties, however, rely on the 1991 Act to argue that such claims are untenable.
Former Union Minister Subramanian Swamy has also filed a petition, requesting the court to “read down” the provisions to allow Hindus to stake claims over disputed sites. Upadhyay, however, contends that the entire law is unconstitutional, dismissing the option of reading it down.
The doctrine of reading down a statute is often invoked to preserve its constitutional validity by interpreting it in a manner consistent with constitutional principles.
Citing the five-judge Constitution Bench ruling in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title case, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has defended the Act, arguing it ensures the preservation of the religious character of places of worship as of the 1947 cut-off date.
The law includes an exception for the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute in Ayodhya, which was adjudicated separately.
The apex court had previously sought the Centre’s response to Upadhyay’s plea, which describes the cut-off date as an “arbitrary and irrational” measure, shielding encroachments by “fundamentalist-barbaric invaders.”
The Act prohibits the conversion of any place of worship and mandates the maintenance of its religious character as it stood on August 15, 1947, barring disputes already settled or exempted by law.
Follow us
