Supreme Court orders courts across countries not to entertain or pass orders on pleas of survey of mosques or temples:
The Supreme Court issued a significant directive on Thursday, instructing courts nationwide to refrain from entertaining or issuing orders on any fresh suits or petitions seeking surveys of mosques to determine if temples previously existed at these locations.
The apex court also imposed restrictions on lower courts, preventing them from issuing orders in existing cases related to such disputes, effectively halting all ongoing survey activities until further notice.
“No survey orders or any other substantive directives should be issued in existing cases,” the Supreme Court emphasized during the hearing of petitions challenging the Places of Worship Act.
The Places of Worship Act of 1991 was implemented to maintain the religious character of all worship sites as they existed at Independence, with the sole exception being the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute in Ayodhya, which has now been resolved.
Nevertheless, the present petitions argue that the Act infringes upon the fundamental rights of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs to recover and restore their places of worship that were allegedly destroyed during historical invasions. The petitioners maintain that the legislation unfairly limits their legal options for reclaiming sites they consider religiously and historically significant.
The Supreme Court bench stated on Thursday, “We are examining the validity, boundaries, and scope of the 1991 law,” indicating a thorough examination of the Act’s provisions in upcoming hearings.
Context: The Sambhal Mosque case and others
The court’s intervention comes in response to numerous petitions filed recently across India, requesting archaeological surveys of mosques based on claims of underlying temple structures. A notable instance is the Sambhal mosque case in Uttar Pradesh, where a district court was considering a petition for an ASI (Archaeological Survey of India) survey of the Teely Wali Masjid. Petitioners assert that the mosque was constructed over the ruins of an ancient Shiva temple.
The Sambhal situation parallels the disputes surrounding the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah mosque in Mathura, where comparable petitions claiming the existence of Hindu temples beneath mosque structures have sparked legal battles and community tensions. The local court in Sambhal was evaluating a survey request before the Supreme Court’s nationwide stay on such proceedings.
The Supreme Court’s balancing act
The top court’s intervention represents an effort to prevent the escalation of litigation that could potentially disturb communal harmony. By suspending new and existing cases, the court has effectively blocked additional surveys while it considers the broader constitutional implications of the Places of Worship Act.
Legal analysts note that the Supreme Court’s ruling will substantially impact ongoing disputes. “This intervention demonstrates the court’s prudent approach toward preventing further surveys that might escalate tensions, while ensuring thorough consideration of the constitutional questions surrounding the Act,” observed a prominent legal expert.
Implications and the road ahead
The situation remains particularly delicate in Uttar Pradesh, where contentious cases involving religious sites in Sambhal, Mathura, and Varanasi have emerged as focal points of tension. The Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision regarding the Places of Worship Act could fundamentally alter the legal landscape governing religious site disputes.
As the judiciary deliberates on these petitions, the central challenge lies in reconciling historical claims with the Act’s fundamental objective of maintaining communal harmony and preserving the status quo. Stakeholders await the next hearing, anticipating how the court will interpret both the constitutional validity and scope of this landmark 1991 legislation.
