New Delhi: Ashwini Upadhyay, a key petitioner challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, on Thursday described the law as “unconstitutional,” arguing that it blocks access to the courts and provides no alternative legal mechanism.
Upadhyay pointed out that while the Waqf Act also limits access to courts, it offers alternative forums such as the Waqf Tribunal or board.
“The law states that the religious character of a place cannot be altered. We agree with this principle, but historical facts show that the Mughals modified the religious character of certain places. Our demand is for the restoration of their original character. Right now, I am in the Supreme Court dressed in black robes, resembling a lawyer. If I were a tilak, I may appear Hindu; if I wear a cap, I may appear Muslim. My outward appearance can change, but determining my true character would require an investigation,” he said.
“Similarly, whether a structure is a temple or a mosque cannot be judged by its outward appearance alone. A survey is crucial to establishing this. No law should obstruct access to the courts. The Places of Worship Act bars such access without providing any alternative tribunal or board, making it unconstitutional,” he added.
The petitioner further emphasised that the issue transcends religious identities and concerns the sovereignty of India.
“The opposing side argued for halting surveys at 18 sites across the country, but we opposed this since those supporting these sites have not even approached the court,” he said.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court restrained all courts across the country from issuing effective interim or final orders, including those authorising surveys, in pending cases against existing religious structures.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and justices PV Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan also ruled that no new suits could be registered on such claims while the court hears petitions challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provision) Act, 1991.
“As the matter is sub judice before this court, we deem it fit to direct that while suits may be filed, no suits will be registered, and proceedings will not commence until further orders of the court. In pending suits, courts will not issue any effective interim or final orders, including orders for surveys,” the bench stated.
The apex court was informed that 18 suits are currently pending nationwide against 10 mosques or shrines.
The bench granted the central government four weeks to submit an affidavit in response to a batch of petitions challenging provisions of the Places of Worship Act that prohibit the filing of lawsuits to reclaim places of worship or alter their character as of August 15, 1947.
