Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act
The Act was enacted to prevent the conversion of religious sites following the rise in communal tensions, especially after the Ram Janmabhoomi movement.
It aims to maintain the status quo and prevents the politicization of religious places, protecting secularism.
The Act applies to all religious communities, ensuring that no place of worship can be converted or its religious character changed after August 15, 1947.
Constitutionality Challenges
Critics argue that the Act takes away judicial review, a core feature of India’s Constitution, which could make the Act unconstitutional.
The date of August 15, 1947, is seen by critics as arbitrary, but the date marks the transfer of power from the British, making it a logical starting point for preserving the religious status quo.
The petitioners claim that the law's restriction on legal actions violates the right to seek judicial redress, but the argument lacks merit as it pertains to the specific religious sites in question.
Surveys and Legal Concerns
Despite the Act clearly settling the religious character of places of worship as of 1947, lower courts continue to order surveys in places like mosques, raising concerns of unnecessary legal battles.
Such surveys have caused public unrest, as seen in Uttar Pradesh, where violence broke out following survey orders, leading to casualties.
These actions risk reopening old wounds and undermining the purpose of the Act
Religious Rights and Fundamental Protections
Article 26 of the Constitution protects a religious group’s right to manage its own affairs, including the use and administration of places of worship.
Any external interference in a place of worship, such as conducting surveys to probe its historical or religious identity, can be seen as a violation of this right.
The Act itself strengthens these protections, ensuring that no government or external agency can disrupt the religious practices or status of a place of worship, thereby maintaining societal peace and respect for religious diversity.
COMMENTS