The Hindu: Published on 10th Nov 2024:
Why in News?
The Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, is set to begin hearings on December 12 regarding multiple petitions challenging the validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. These hearings are critical as they could influence the future of secularism in India, communal harmony, and legal challenges surrounding places of worship like the Gyanvapi mosque (Varanasi), Shahi Idgah mosque (Mathura), and others.
Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991:
What is the Act?
The Places of Worship Act, 1991 was enacted to preserve the status quo of all religious places of worship as they existed on August 15, 1947.
Key Provisions:
No suit or proceedings can be initiated to alter the religious status of any place of worship.
The Act excludes certain cases, such as:
The Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute (then ongoing).
Sites covered under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
Cases that were already settled before the Act came into force.
Significance:
It is seen as a safeguard against religious disputes by preventing the misuse of judicial platforms to revisit historical grievances.
Supreme Court Hearings:
The petitions challenge the Act, claiming it violates the rights of Hindus and others to reclaim places of worship allegedly built on temple ruins.
The petitioners argue that the Act legalizes historical depredations and violates fundamental rights, such as the right to practice and propagate religion.
However, the Supreme Court’s Ayodhya judgment already reaffirmed the Act's importance, stating that it enforces India’s commitment to secularism.
The Court observed that the Act promotes "non-retrogression"—ensuring secular values are not eroded.
Secularism in India:
Secularism Defined:
Secularism in India, as enshrined in the Constitution, ensures the state treats all religions equally and does not favor any.
Impact of Challenge:
If the Places of Worship Act is struck down or diluted, it could reopen communal tensions by encouraging claims over religious sites, potentially disturbing secular harmony.
Irony in Petitions:
The petitioners, while challenging the Act, argue it undermines secularism. However, such attempts to reclaim historical religious sites themselves challenge the secular principle of non-retrogression.
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court hearings on the Places of Worship Act, 1991 will be a defining moment for secularism in India. The Act plays a pivotal role in preserving communal harmony and ensuring that historical grievances do not disturb contemporary peace. The Ayodhya judgment has already recognized the Act as essential for safeguarding secularism. Any decision to dilute or strike it down could have far-reaching consequences on the communal fabric of the country.
