Places of Worship Act,1991
The biggest feature of independent India has been democracy, as well as secularism, which is embedded in the basic structure of the Constitution. This vision was clear to our forefathers who framed the Constitution, even when Pakistan was created by dividing India along religious lines. Ninety percent of our Constitution was written after the partition, primarily by the Constituent Assembly under the leadership of Baba Saheb Ambedkar. However, the Constituent Assembly had already presented the 'Objective Resolution' in 1946, which outlined India's commitment to becoming a secular nation. Therefore, secularism has been an integral part of our Constitution from the very beginning.
The Constitution introduced the concept of 'State' for the citizens of India, granting equal rights to every individual, regardless of caste, religion, sect, creed, or gender. It also affirmed that everyone has the right to live and worship according to their beliefs, while declaring that the state itself would have no religion.
In 1991, in response to the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, the Indian Parliament passed the 'Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act.' The Act stipulated that, except for the disputed site in Ayodhya, the status of religious places in India as they were on August 15, 1947, cannot be altered. It also stated that no court in the country would hear any case regarding the status of these religious places. Recently, however, a petition challenging the constitutionality of this law was filed in the Supreme Court, and it is currently under consideration by the highest court in the country.
The Act was passed in 1991 by the Congress-led government of P.V. Narasimha Rao. Opposing this petition, the management committee of the Gyanvapi Mosque in Kashi has argued in court that if the petitions challenging the law's validity are accepted, it would have disastrous consequences. They warn that it could open the door to changing the nature of mosques, mazaars, khanqahs, and other religious sites across the country, which would not only endanger India's secularism but also escalate communal tensions. The controversy over the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal city, Uttar Pradesh, led to a communal frenzy in which six civilians were killed, further highlighting the potential dangers of such actions.
If we look closely, the committee is arguing that the Supreme Court wants to ban the hearing of petitions in the lower courts of the country regarding the existence of a mosque or mazar as a temple or Hindu place. We must examine this matter in the context of India's unity and integrity. India is not an ideological state but a territorial state. This means that in any part of India, a person who follows any religion is a respected citizen of the country and has equal rights. All citizens have the right to practice their religion individually. Therefore, if any injustice was done to a community in history, how can the present generation claim the right to reverse it?
As far as the Ram temple in Ayodhya is concerned, it was considered an exception by the Supreme Court in its 2019 judgment. Therefore, there is substantial merit in the argument that the issue of places of worship should not be reopened. Some citizens of India have also begun demanding that Hindu temples built on top of Buddhist shrines in ancient centuries should be addressed.
In fact, such a debate is completely meaningless in present-day India because, if such related petitions are accepted in the lower courts, the unity and integrity of India could be threatened. Hindus and Muslims have struggled shoulder to shoulder for independence. The British were responsible for their 200 years of rule and did everything they could to divide Indians along religious lines. However, it is also the responsibility of the majority Hindu society in India not to waste its energy on proving that mosques were once temples. This is the message conveyed by the Supreme Court in the 2019 Ram Janmabhoomi verdict, in which the court stated that the courts can no longer overturn centuries-old events.
However, for this to happen, the minority Muslim community must also show generosity in the interest of the country and hand over the Gyanvapi mosque in the Kashi Vishwanath complex to Hindus, as this mosque is believed to be built on the walls of the temple. As for the 1991 law, the Supreme Court has the authority to examine its constitutional validity, but it will have to consider its own decision regarding the Ram Janmabhoomi temple in 2019, which clearly stated that history cannot be changed.