SC Bars Civil Courts From Hearing Worship Site Ownership Disputes Until Next Date Of Hearing

The Supreme Court on Thursday prohibited civil courts across India from entertaining new suits or issuing orders regarding ownership and title disputes related to places of worship.

"We deem it fit to direct that no fresh suits shall be registered or proceedings be ordered. In the pending suits, no effective interim orders or final orders including orders of survey can be granted by civil courts till the next date of hearing," stated the court.

Photo Credit: PTI

This directive covers disputes such as the Gyanvapi mosque case in Varanasi, the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple case in Mathura, and others. The court was informed that such cases are pending in at least ten locations, reported the Indian Express.

A three-judge bench, led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, was hearing a series of writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship Act, 1991.

The Court also instructed the Centre to submit its response within four weeks.

The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 stipulates that the religious character of all places of worship, except the Ayodhya site under litigation at the time, must remain as it was on 15 August 1947. Enacted during the tenure of the P.V. Narasimha Rao-led Congress government amid the Ram temple movement, the Act also applies to the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque complex in Varanasi and the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple-Shahi Idgah mosque complex in Mathura.

The Act has faced challenges from multiple petitions, which argue that it infringes upon the remedy of judicial review-a fundamental feature of the Constitution, as outlined in the Supreme Court's 1980 judgment in *Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors.* The petitioners contend that the Act also violates the principle of secularism.

Hindu organisations have called for the Act to be repealed. Despite being served notice over three years ago, the government has yet to clarify its position on the matter before the court.

Context

In June 2020, the Lucknow-based Vishwa Bhadra Pujari Purohit Mahasangh challenged the Act in the Supreme Court. Shortly after, the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind also approached the court, seeking to be included in the proceedings. The Jamiat argued that "even issuance of notice in the... matter will create fear in the minds of the Muslim community with regard to their places of worship, especially in the aftermath of the Ayodhya dispute and will destroy the secular fabric of the nation." Additional petitions followed, including one from a member of the erstwhile royal family of Kashi. The court, however, expressed reluctance to entertain multiple writ petitions on the same issue and advised parties to file intervention applications instead.

Opposing these petitions, the management committee of the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi filed an intervention application, warning that the "consequences" of entertaining such pleas "are bound to be drastic."

The mosque committee highlighted the unrest in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, where a court's approval of a survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid on the very day a suit was filed led to violence.