PMF IAS General Science Book Cover
PMF IAS General Science Book Cover

Places of Worship Act, 1991

  • Context (IE): Supreme Court barred district courts across the country from registering fresh suits challenging the ownership and title of any place of worship or ordering surveys of disputed religious places until further orders.
  • In May 2022, an oral observation by the then Chief Justice of India that a survey would not violate the 1991 Places of Worship Act effectively became the basis for several such suits and surveys.

About Places of Worship Act, 1991

  • The Places of Worship Act, 1991, was passed by the P V Narasimha Rao-led Congress government.

Objectives of the Act

  • To provide for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship.
  • To prohibit conversion of any place of worship.
  • To curb communal tension.

Places of Worship Act

Significant Provisions of the Act

Prohibition of Conversion (Section 3)

  • Prevents the conversion of a place of worship, whether in whole or part, from one religious denomination to another or within the same denomination.

Maintenance of Religious Character (Section 4(1))

  • Ensures that the religious identity of a place of worship remains the same as it was on August 15, 1947.

Abatement of Pending Cases (Section 4(2))

  • Any ongoing legal proceedings concerning the conversion of a place of worship’s religious character before August 15, 1947, will be terminated, and no new cases can be initiated.
  • Legal proceedings can be initiated if the status change occurred after August 15, 1947.

Exceptions to the Act (Section 5)

  • The act does not apply to
    • Ancient and historical monuments, archaeological sites, and remains covered by the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act of 1958.
    • Cases that have already been settled or resolved and disputes that have been resolved by mutual agreement or conversions that occurred before the Act came into effect.
    • Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, including any associated legal proceedings.

Penalties (Section 6)

  • Penalties for violating the Act include a maximum imprisonment term of three years and fines.

Criticism of Places of Worship Act

Bar on Judicial Review

  • The act prevents judicial review, a fundamental aspect of the Constitution. This undermines the checks and balances system and limits the judiciary’s role in protecting constitutional rights.

Arbitrary Retrospective Cutoff Date

  • Arbitrary date (Independence Day, 1947) to determine the status of religious places disregards historical injustices and denies redressal for encroachments before that date.

Violation of the Right to Religion (Art 25-28)

  • The act infringes upon the religious rights of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs (Violates the principle of secularism (Art 25-28))
  • It restricts their ability to reclaim their places of worship, impeding their freedom to practice their religion.

Exclusion of Ayodhya Dispute

  • The act raises concerns about the differential treatment of religious sites.
  • It undermines the equal treatment of religions under the law (Art 14-15)

Dilutes Federalism

  • The act covers “Pilgrimage sites” or “burial grounds” (which are placed in the State List). This violates the rights of the states.
    • Centre’s Response: Entry 97 of the Union List’s residuary power allows the centre to enforce the act w.r.t “Pilgrimage sites” or “burial grounds”.
  • Historical Claims: Destroyed temples retain their sanctity under Hindu law, challenging mosque validity under Islamic law.
  • Lack of Clarity: Whether the Act bars questioning a site’s “original” status or just its altered state.
  • Rising Civil Suits: Contesting the origins of mosques, violating the 1991 Act.
  • Judicial Delays: Pending petitions challenging the Act’s constitutionality have emboldened lower courts to entertain prohibited suits.
  • Impact on Communal Harmony: Suits questioning religious sites risk escalating communal tensions.
  • Role of Judiciary: Oral remarks by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud on allowing status inquiries sparked debates on the Act’s interpretation.
  • Legislative Intent: Experts emphasise the law’s clear intent to prohibit reopening historical disputes over religious sites.

SC’s views on the Act

  • In the 2019 Ayodhya verdict, the SC held that the Act manifests the secular values of the Constitution and strictly prohibits retrogression.
  • It provides confidence to every religious community that their places of worship will be preserved and that their character will not be altered.
  • The law and its norms bind those who govern the nation’s affairs at every level. Those norms implement the Fundamental Duties under Article 51A and are positive mandates to every citizen.

Way Forward

  • Judicial Finality: SC must expedite hearings to clarify ambiguities and ensure adherence to the Act.
  • Legislative Backing: Government must defend the Act’s constitutionality to uphold communal harmony.
  • Public Awareness: Promoting understanding of the Act’s significance in preserving the secular fabric.

Newsletter Updates

Subscribe to our newsletter and never miss an important update!

Assured Discounts on our New Products!

Leave a Reply

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

Newsletter

Never miss an important update!