The Supreme Court of India on Thursday issued significant directions while hearing petitions challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. The court ruled that until the final disposal of these petitions, no new cases related to disputes involving temples and mosques will be filed. A special bench headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Krishnaswami Viswanathan presided over the hearing, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the status quo on these matters.
The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, prohibits altering the character of any religious site as it existed on August 15, 1947, and bars legal claims seeking such changes. The Supreme Court emphasized that this restriction would remain in effect during the ongoing hearings and directed the Central Government to file its response within four weeks. It also instructed lower courts to refrain from issuing any effective or final orders, including survey-related directives, in cases pertaining to disputes under the Act.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Raju Ramachandran, representing one of the petitioners, pointed out that over ten cases have already been filed in various courts concerning this issue. He urged the Supreme Court to impose a stay on further proceedings in these cases. The Central Government opposed this request, asserting that such matters should not be collectively restrained. The Supreme Court, citing the example of an ongoing case in Mathura, noted that three similar suits are already pending and need resolution within the legal framework.
Justice Krishnaswami Viswanathan observed that when a matter is under the Supreme Court’s consideration, civil courts should not proceed in parallel. He highlighted the need for an organized system, such as a portal, to consolidate responses and streamline the submission of relevant documents. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta supported this suggestion, proposing the creation of a Google Drive link to facilitate information sharing.
The hearing also witnessed objections from some lawyers regarding survey orders issued by lower courts in related cases. However, the Supreme Court refrained from making any specific comments on these objections.
This case holds significant national importance, as the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act has been a focal point of disputes involving religious sites. The Supreme Court’s decision to halt new cases until the resolution of these petitions signals its intent to ensure uniformity and prevent further legal complexities surrounding the sensitive issue.
