The Indian Supreme Court deliberates on the Places of Worship Act of 1991, contentious for potentially reigniting inter-religious discord as Hindu groups challenge the status of various mosques.
Controversial Places of Worship Law Under Supreme Court Scrutiny
Controversial Places of Worship Law Under Supreme Court Scrutiny
India's Places of Worship law, which safeguards religious sites as of 1947, faces legal challenges amidst rising religious tensions.
Article text:
The Supreme Court of India is currently addressing several petitions that challenge the controversial Places of Worship Act of 1991, a law designed to maintain the religious character of places of worship as they stood at the time of India's independence in 1947. This law prohibits alterations to the identity of any religious site, including temples, mosques, churches, and gurdwaras, and aims to avert judicial disputes regarding their status, except for the Babri Masjid case, which has been specifically exempted.
The Babri Masjid, a mosque dating back to the 16th century, became the epicenter of a longstanding conflict culminating in its demolition by Hindu activists in 1992. A pivotal ruling in 2019 shifted ownership of the disputed land to Hindu groups for temple construction, raising concerns about the implications for India’s secular framework and its diverse religious landscape.
Current petitions, including one from a member of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, argue that the 1991 law stifles religious freedom. However, many opposition leaders and Muslim advocates assert that maintaining the law is vital for protecting minority worship sites in a predominantly Hindu nation. They raise alarms that any modification to the law may unleash a barrage of challenges that could exacerbate religious tensions, particularly between Hindu and Muslim communities.
In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court temporarily halted courts from registering new cases contesting the ownership of religious sites or conducting surveys to define their status, with the next hearing set for February. This decision comes amidst increasing legal battles over the status of numerous mosques, including the contentious Gyanvapi and Shahi Eidgah sites in Varanasi and Mathura.
The legislation emerged during a tumultuous time, as sectarian strife was rising in connection with efforts by Hindu nationalists to construct a temple at the Babri site. At the time of the law's introduction, then-Home Minister SB Chavan voiced concerns about the rise of intolerance and the threat of forced conversions of worship sites that could create new disputes.
While the BJP opposed the 1991 law, arguing that it appeased minorities, the eventual demolition of the Babri Masjid within months of its enactment highlighted the law's challenges. The Supreme Court later deemed the mosque’s destruction illegal.
The ongoing legal discourse revolves around numerous sites where Hindu groups contest the historical ownership of mosques. A recent case in Rajasthan has reignited discussions regarding the Ajmer Sharif shrine, with some claiming it rests atop a former Hindu temple, illustrating the volatility of such claims.
As these cases emerge, violent confrontations have ensued, such as last month’s incident in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, where tensions flared during a court-ordered assessment of a 16th-century mosque. Previous surveys, such as that of the Gyanvapi mosque, have similarly ignited disputes, as historians and religious leaders grapple with the historical complexities surroundingsuch archaeological sites.
While the Supreme Court weighs its decision on the Places of Worship law, the outcome could significantly influence India's inter-religious relations and the fate of numerous contested religious edifices across the country.
The Supreme Court of India is currently addressing several petitions that challenge the controversial Places of Worship Act of 1991, a law designed to maintain the religious character of places of worship as they stood at the time of India's independence in 1947. This law prohibits alterations to the identity of any religious site, including temples, mosques, churches, and gurdwaras, and aims to avert judicial disputes regarding their status, except for the Babri Masjid case, which has been specifically exempted.
The Babri Masjid, a mosque dating back to the 16th century, became the epicenter of a longstanding conflict culminating in its demolition by Hindu activists in 1992. A pivotal ruling in 2019 shifted ownership of the disputed land to Hindu groups for temple construction, raising concerns about the implications for India’s secular framework and its diverse religious landscape.
Current petitions, including one from a member of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, argue that the 1991 law stifles religious freedom. However, many opposition leaders and Muslim advocates assert that maintaining the law is vital for protecting minority worship sites in a predominantly Hindu nation. They raise alarms that any modification to the law may unleash a barrage of challenges that could exacerbate religious tensions, particularly between Hindu and Muslim communities.
In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court temporarily halted courts from registering new cases contesting the ownership of religious sites or conducting surveys to define their status, with the next hearing set for February. This decision comes amidst increasing legal battles over the status of numerous mosques, including the contentious Gyanvapi and Shahi Eidgah sites in Varanasi and Mathura.
The legislation emerged during a tumultuous time, as sectarian strife was rising in connection with efforts by Hindu nationalists to construct a temple at the Babri site. At the time of the law's introduction, then-Home Minister SB Chavan voiced concerns about the rise of intolerance and the threat of forced conversions of worship sites that could create new disputes.
While the BJP opposed the 1991 law, arguing that it appeased minorities, the eventual demolition of the Babri Masjid within months of its enactment highlighted the law's challenges. The Supreme Court later deemed the mosque’s destruction illegal.
The ongoing legal discourse revolves around numerous sites where Hindu groups contest the historical ownership of mosques. A recent case in Rajasthan has reignited discussions regarding the Ajmer Sharif shrine, with some claiming it rests atop a former Hindu temple, illustrating the volatility of such claims.
As these cases emerge, violent confrontations have ensued, such as last month’s incident in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, where tensions flared during a court-ordered assessment of a 16th-century mosque. Previous surveys, such as that of the Gyanvapi mosque, have similarly ignited disputes, as historians and religious leaders grapple with the historical complexities surroundingsuch archaeological sites.
While the Supreme Court weighs its decision on the Places of Worship law, the outcome could significantly influence India's inter-religious relations and the fate of numerous contested religious edifices across the country.
