Supreme Court bars fresh suits on places of worship act until next hearing

In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has directed civil courts nationwide to refrain from registering new suits or issuing orders related to the ownership and title disputes of places of worship until the next hearing. This directive includes a hold on any effective interim or final orders in ongoing cases.

A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna made this decision while hearing a series of writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. The Act mandates that the religious character of places of worship, except for the one in Ayodhya, should remain as it was on August 15, 1947.

Key Points from the Hearing:

No New Suits or Orders: The court has instructed that no new suits shall be registered, and no proceedings shall be ordered. In existing cases, civil courts are barred from passing effective interim or final orders, including orders of survey, until the next date of hearing.

Impact on Major Disputes: This ruling impacts several high-profile disputes, including the Gyanvapi mosque dispute in Varanasi and the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple dispute in Mathura. The court noted that similar suits are pending in at least 10 locations across the country.

Response from the Centre: The Supreme Court has directed the central government to file its response within four weeks.

Background of the Act:

The Places of Worship Act was enacted in 1991 by the P V Narasimha Rao-led Congress government during the Ram temple movement. The Act aims to maintain the status quo of all places of worship as of August 15, 1947, excluding the Ayodhya site, which was under litigation at the time. It also covers the disputed Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque complex in Varanasi and the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple-Shahi Idgah mosque complex in Mathura.

Challenges to the Act:

Several petitions have been filed challenging the Act on grounds that it prevents judicial review—a fundamental feature of the Constitution as upheld by the Supreme Court in the Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors vs. Union Of India & Ors case in 1980. Petitioners argue that the Act violates the principle of secularism.

Intervention Applications:

In response to these petitions, the management committee of the Gyanvapi mosque has filed an intervention application, warning of the drastic consequences of allowing such pleas. Similarly, the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has sought to join the case, expressing concerns about the potential fear and disruption this could cause in the Muslim community.

The court has decided to consolidate the petitions to avoid multiple writs on the same issue, urging parties to file intervention applications instead.

This decision marks a crucial step in the ongoing debate over the Places of Worship Act and its implications for India's secular fabric and judicial processes.