NEW DELHI: SC on Friday agreed to examine the contrasting arguments of Hindu and Muslim sides on applicability of the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which freezes the religious character of structures as it existed on Aug 15, 1947, to Mathura’s Shahi Idgah-Srikrishna Janmasthan, protected under the ASI Act.
The Muslim side said Allahabad HC’s decision to club all 15 suits filed by Hindu sides, claiming right of worship over the entire disputed land, was wrong and went against the provisions of the PoW (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
SC: HC call to bunch suits filed by Hindu sides appears correct
The bench of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan, said HC’s decision to bunch the suits filed by Hindu sides “prima facie appears to be correct”, a reiteration of the view it had taken during the hearing on Jan 10.
The Muslim side was represented by advocate Tasneem Ahmadi. Ahmadi said the PoW (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 barred high court from entertaining any suit that intended to change the religious character of the structure to one other than what it was on Aug 15, 1947. For the Hindu side, advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain said since the Idgah was a protected monument under ASI Act, it would not come under the ambit of PoW Act. When Ahmadi protested Jain’s stand, the bench said, “If you take defence under the 1991 Act, they are entitled to counter it by arguing the Act is not applicable to the structure.”
The bench said that it had on Dec 12 barred courts from passing any interim order in suits relating to temple-mosque disputes and asked courts not to entertain any fresh suit for reclamation of temples which were converted into mosques during Islamic rule, including disputes relating to Varanasi’s Gyanvapi-Kashi Viswanath and Mathura’s Shahi Idgah-Srikrishna Janmasthan. The bench on Dec 12 also directed, “In pending suits, trial courts will not pass any effective and final order including orders for survey till the next date of hearing.”
Allahabad HC had on Aug 1 last year ruled that suits were not barred by any provisions of Waqf Act, PoW Act, Specific Relief Act, Limitation Act or Civil Procedure Code. HC on Oct 23 last year had rejected the Muslim side’s plea for recall of its Jan 11, 2024, order directing consolidation of all suits on the Shahi Idgah-Srikrishna Janmasthan dispute.
SC agreed to list the appeal by the Muslim side, challenging the orders – consolidation of suits and non-applicability of PoW Act to the Idgah – along with cross petitions on PoW Act. Some of these petitions challenge the constitutional validity of PoW Act while others seek its implementation in letter and spirit. The hearing on these petitions is scheduled for April 8.