The Places of Worship Act, passed by Parliament in 1991, maintains that the religious character of any place of worship should not be altered from what it was on August 15, 1947, the day India gained independence. It mandates that no person can alter the nature of any place of worship by seeking to convert it into a different religious establishment. The law was designed to preserve communal harmony and prevent the escalation of disputes over religious sites. The Gyanvapi mosque petition highlights concerns that attempts to change the character of the mosque could violate the intent of this legislation.
The mosque is situated near the Kashi Vishwanath temple, one of the holiest sites for Hindus, which has contributed to the intensity of the legal battle. In recent years, there have been multiple claims that the mosque was built on the site of an ancient Hindu temple, triggering legal actions and court hearings. The petitioners argue that the Places of Worship Act should offer legal protection to the Gyanvapi mosque, preventing any attempt to alter its status, given its long-standing history as a mosque.
The Varanasi district court, earlier this year, ordered a survey of the mosque following claims that a Hindu idol was found inside its premises. This sparked a series of protests and counterclaims, with Hindu groups demanding access to the site for worship. The issue has intensified debates about the interpretation of the Places of Worship Act and its applicability in cases where historical and religious identities are contested.
Legal experts have weighed in on the matter, stating that the petition before the Supreme Court may set a significant precedent in interpreting the law. They note that while the Places of Worship Act aims to preserve the status quo of places of worship, the interpretation of what constitutes a 'change' in religious character can be complex, especially in cases involving disputed religious history.
The Supreme Court’s ruling could potentially impact other similar cases across India, where disputes over religious sites and their historical backgrounds have often resulted in protracted legal battles. Some legal analysts argue that a ruling in favor of the mosque’s protection under the Act could strengthen the position of religious minorities in India, providing a legal shield against what they describe as attempts to alter the status of places of worship for political or ideological reasons.
However, the petition is likely to face opposition from groups that believe that the Gyanvapi mosque was constructed at the site of an ancient Hindu temple and, as such, should be open for further scrutiny and legal action. These opposing groups argue that the Places of Worship Act should not be a barrier to addressing what they claim is a historical wrong.
The central government has been silent on the matter so far, but the ruling may also influence its stance on other similar controversies across the country. The government’s role in upholding the Places of Worship Act and its interpretation will be closely watched as the Supreme Court prepares to hear the case.
The petition by the Gyanvapi mosque committee also calls for the immediate suspension of any further surveys or religious practices related to the ongoing dispute until the Supreme Court provides clarity on the law’s applicability. This request reflects the mosque's desire for judicial intervention to stop any further legal challenges that might arise from the ongoing temple-mosque debates in India.
This case has become emblematic of the broader struggle over religious identity and historical memory in India. The Gyanvapi mosque dispute, like many others in the country, touches on deeply held religious sentiments, historical narratives, and political concerns. The outcome of this case will have far-reaching implications, not just for the mosque but also for the broader question of how India handles disputes over places of worship that have historical and religious significance to different communities.
The involvement of the Supreme Court underscores the legal complexity and sensitivity of the case, which has been a flashpoint for political and religious discourse in India. As the country navigates these divisive issues, the interpretation of laws such as the Places of Worship Act will continue to be a subject of intense debate, with each case contributing to shaping the future of India’s religious landscape.