The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a new petition challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, highlighting that it would not entertain multiple proceedings regarding the same legal issue. The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, emphasized the redundancy of the petitions and advised against repeated filings on similar grounds.
The petitioner, law student Nitin Upadhyay, was, however, granted the liberty to integrate his arguments into an existing batch of cases where the constitutional validity of the Act is currently under review. Upadhyay’s challenge was specifically aimed at a provision of the 1991 Act, which requires that the religious character of places of worship be maintained as it was on August 15, 1947, barring any alterations.
During the hearing, Upadhyay’s counsel argued that there was a “subtle difference” in their petition compared to others. Nevertheless, the court was unconvinced and directed that any new grounds for challenge could be addressed within the framework of the ongoing cases.
The Places of Worship Act was enacted under the PV Narasimha Rao government amidst the backdrop of the Ayodhya Ram Mandir movement. It essentially freezes the religious character of places of worship as they existed at the time of India’s Independence, except for the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site. This exclusion stems from the site’s ongoing litigation at the time, which culminated in the Supreme Court’s 2019 verdict that allowed the construction of a Ram temple at the site.
The Act has been a legal barrier against alterations to the status of other contested religious sites, including those in Mathura and Varanasi. It does not apply to ancient monuments or archaeological sites protected under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
In response to ongoing disputes and court actions concerning the religious character of existing structures, the Supreme Court, in December 2024, restrained lower courts from registering new suits or ordering surveys related to such matters. This interim order affects ongoing legal cases involving prominent sites like the Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi mosque and the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah.
Upadhyay’s petition sought judicial permission to reassess the original religious character of worship places and challenged the prohibition against legal proceedings intended to alter a site’s religious identity, arguing that it infringes on fundamental rights and the basic structure of the Constitution.
The controversy surrounding the Places of Worship Act has drawn various political and ideological stakeholders into a broad legal debate, with parties like the Congress defending the law as essential for maintaining communal harmony and upholding secularism, while others argue it restricts their rights to reclaim religious sites.
