Places of Worship Act: Supreme Court stays surveys, fresh suits against existing religious structures

In a significant order, the Supreme Court on Thursday 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..A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan said that the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991 expressly prohibits institution of such suits and the same cannot proceed until the validity of the 1991 law itself is decided.This was affirmed in the Ayodhya verdict by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, the Bench added."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 Court directed.The Bench further said that no new suits can be registered over such claims."The matter is sub judice. No further suits can be registered till we hear and dispose of the case," the Court said.The Court was hearing a batch of petitions challenging provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991 which protects religious character of structures as it stood on August 15, 1947. The Court today also directed the Central government to file its counter-affidavit to the pleas challenging the validity of the Act."Union government has not filed a counter. Let the counter filed within four weeks. Respondents to do the same. Copy of counter to be served on petitioners. Petitioner shall file rejoinder within 4 weeks after counter," the Court directed..The order will impact at least 18 suits filed over four religious structures.These suits have been filed by various Hindu organisations and individuals who have sought rights over Muslim mosques on claims that these mosques were built over ancient temples.These suits include those concerning the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi, the Shahi Eidgah Masjid in Mathura and the Ajmer Dargah in Rajasthan. The Muslim parties have opposed the maintainability of such suits by citing the Places of Worship Act..Background.The petitions before the Supreme Court have assailed the validity of the law itself. Among those who have petitioned the apex court in the matter is Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Ashwini Upadhyay, on whose plea the Court had issued notice in 2021. His plea states that the Act allows illegal acts of invaders who took over religious places to continue for perpetuity by barring legal remedies to aggrieved Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs.In June 2022, the Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind moved the apex court seeking impleadment in the petition, contending that it was apparent that Upadhyay has sought to indirectly target places of worship which are presently of Islamic character.Petitions challenging the Places of Worship Act were filed by others as well, including the Vishwa Bhadra Pujari Purohit Mahasangh. Several impleadment petitions have also been filed since in the matter. .The law seeks to protect the status of all religious structures as it stood on the date of independence (August 1947) by barring courts from entertaining cases which raise dispute over the character of such places of worship.The law which was introduced during the height of Ram Janmabhoomi movement seeks to protect the status of all religious structures as it stood on the date of independence by barring courts from entertaining cases which raises dispute over the character of such places of worship.The law further provides that such cases already pending in courts would stand abated.The Act, however, carved an exception for Ram-Janambhoomi site which was the basis for courts including High Court and Supreme Court hearing that matter.Since Ayodhya land was exempted, the Supreme Court had invoked this law in 2019 while awarding the disputed site at Ayodhya to child deity Ram Lalla. The Supreme Court had, however, reaffirmed in that judgment that similar such cases cannot be entertained with respect to other sites in view of the Act..Hearing today.During the hearing today, Senior Advocate Raju Ramachandran, appearing for Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind, told the Court that there are at least 18 suits pending before various courts and the proceedings in those cases should be stayed."Proceedings need to be stayed for the time being. Surveys are being ordered," Ramachandran said.Solicitor General Tushar Mehta objected to Ramachandran's argument."Can a stranger, who is not a party to the case, come and say stay all the proceedings," he asked.However, the Bench deemed it fit to stay further orders and surveys being passed by trial courts."See you have to meet an argument in Section 3. When Supreme Court has laid down the law in a 5-judge bench composition (in Ayodhya case), then lower courts cannot wrest it out. That is why proceedings need to be stayed," Justice Viswanathan remarked..The Court then proceeded to appoint nodal counsel on behalf of various parties."Advocate Ejaz Maqbool is appointed nodal counsel for parties seeking Enforcement of the Place of Worship Act. Advocate Kanu Agrawal is appointed as nodal counsel for Union of India. Advocate Vishnu Jain is the nodal counsel on behalf of parties challenging validity of the Act," the Bench directed..[Read Order].[Read Live Coverage]