Thursday : May 1, 2025
05 : 15 : 00 AM
Breaking News

Elon Musk's replacement as CEO is being sought by the Tesla board: Report

A new petition regarding the Places of Worship Act is denied by the SC.

top-news



In a significant ruling, the **Supreme Court of India** has dismissed a fresh petition challenging the constitutional validity of the **Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991**, reinforcing the law’s mandate to **freeze the religious character of places of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947**. The verdict comes amid heightened political and religious tensions over disputed sites, including the **Gyanvapi Mosque-Kashi Vishwanath** and **Shahi Idgah-Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi** cases.  

---

*What is the Places of Worship Act, 1991?**  

Enacted during the **P.V. Narasimha Rao government**, the law aims to:  
✔ **Prohibit conversion** of any place of worship’s religious identity from its status on **Independence Day (August 15, 1947)**.  
✔ **Exceptions:** Only the **Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute** was excluded (later resolved via the 2019 Ayodhya verdict).  
✔ **Legal Penalties:** Violators face up to **3 years in jail**.  

The law was intended to **prevent communal conflicts** by preserving the **secular fabric of post-Independence India**.  

---

*The Latest Petition & Supreme Court’s Stand**  

A **Hindu right-wing group** had challenged the Act, arguing:  
- It **violates Hindus’ right to reclaim temples** allegedly destroyed by medieval rulers.  
- It **infringes on religious freedom (Article 25)** and **right to judicial remedy (Article 32)**.  

SC’s Key Observations:**  
1. **"No Merit in Reopening Settled Law":** The bench, led by **CJI D.Y. Chandrachud**, cited its **2022 Ayodhya verdict**, where it upheld the Act’s validity.  
2. **"Secularism is a Basic Feature of Constitution":** The court emphasized that **historical wrongs cannot be remedied by violating the rule of law**.  
3. **"Petition is Politically Motivated":** The SC noted that **repeated challenges waste judicial time**.  

---

Why is This Ruling Significant?**  

1. **Shuts Door on Gyanvapi/Shahi Idgah-Like Claims:**  
   - The verdict **indirectly strengthens the status quo** in ongoing disputes like **Varanasi’s Gyanvapi Mosque** and **Mathura’s Shahi Idgah**, where Hindu groups seek ownership.  
   - Courts cannot entertain pleas to **alter the 1947 religious character** of these sites.  

2. **Reaffirms Secular Framework:**  
   - The judgment underscores that **India’s constitutional commitment to secularism outweighs majoritarian demands**.  

3. **Political Implications:**  
   - **BJP/RSS:** Some factions have long demanded the Act’s repeal, but the SC ruling limits legal avenues.  
   - **Opposition:** Parties like Congress and AIMIM welcome the decision as a **safeguard against communal polarization**.  

---

Exceptions & Pending Legal Battles**  

While the Act bars **new claims**, exceptions exist:  
- **Archaeological Evidence:** Courts can consider **historical findings** (like in Ayodhya).  
- **Ownership Disputes:** Civil suits over **land rights** (not religious conversion) are still permissible.  

Ongoing Cases:**  
- **Gyanvapi Mosque:** A **Varanasi court** is hearing a plea for Hindu prayers in the mosque’s basement.  
- **Shahi Idgah:** The **Allahabad HC** is adjudicating a plea claiming the mosque stands on Krishna’s birthplace.  

---

Criticism & Support for the Verdict**  

**Supporters Argue:**  
- Prevents **communal flare-ups** and endless litigation.  
- Upholds **India’s pluralistic ethos**.  

**Critics Counter:**  
- **"Denies Justice to Hindus":** Right-wing groups allege the Act **locks in "Islamic conquests."**  
- **"Selective Secularism":** Some question why only **Ayodhya was exempted**.  

---

Global Context: How Other Nations Handle Such Disputes**  
- **Turkey (Hagia Sophia):** Converted from museum to mosque in 2020, sparking debates.  
- **Israel (Al-Aqsa Mosque):** Jewish claims to the Temple Mount remain a flashpoint.  

India’s **Places of Worship Act** was designed to avoid such conflicts—but passions over history persist.  

---

Conclusion: A Victory for Constitutional Secularism? 

The Supreme Court’s dismissal of the petition **cements the 1991 Act as a cornerstone of India’s secular framework**. While it may disappoint Hindu revivalists, the ruling aims to **prioritize social harmony over historical grievances**.  

However, with temple-mosque disputes still simmering**, the real test lies in **whether political and religious groups respect the judiciary’s authority—or exploit emotions for electoral gains**. For now, the law stands firm, but the **broader debate over history, faith, and justice remains unresolved**.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search

Category

Gallery

  • gallery
  • gallery
  • gallery
  • gallery
  • gallery
  • gallery

Tags

Social Media

Related Posts

top-news

Following a conversation with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, S. Jaishankar posted: "Planners and backers must be."

top-news

Palwasha Mohammad Zai Khan is who? According to a senator, the Pak army will lay the first brick at the rebuilt Babri.

top-news

Days after the Pahalgam terror assault, India blocks Pakistani aircraft from using its airspace.