Supreme Court today takes up validity of Places of Worship Act | India News – Times of India

NEW DELHI: A day before the Supreme Court’s hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the validity of the law on places of worshipCitizens from different walks of life, including noted academicians, historians, former IAS and IPS officers, MPs and political parties, have filed applications in support of the law, saying it was aimed at protecting secularism and to ensure harmony in the community.
They told the court that the petition to strike down the law was based on complete ignorance of history and glossed over the fact that Hindu kings had also demolished Hindu temples, Buddhist shrines and Jain temples in conquered areas and built their own structures in their place installed.
Countering the claim that many religious structures were taken over and converted into mosques when Mughals invaded the country, some petitioners said that even if it were accepted that certain mosques were built after demolition of Hindu temples by invaders, there could be no end to such claims. many Hindu temples were built on ruins of Buddhist stupas and Buddhists could claim the right to restore such temples to stupas. They said the law was introduced to end the controversy and maintain peace and harmony in the community.
Some of the prominent people who approached SC individually or in groups included former Punjab DGP Julio Ribeiro, former Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah, former Delhi LG Najeeb Jung, former Chief Election Commissioner SY Quraishi, Lt Gen Zamiruddin Shah (retired), former Home Minister Gopal Krishna Pillai, noted historians Romila Thapa and Mridula Mukherjee, and MPs Manoj Jha of RJD and Thol Thirumavalavan by VKK. The common theme in their pleas was that the 1991 Act was intended to preserve India’s social fabric and promote communal harmony, and to oppose the reopening of settled issues relating to religious sites.
Petitions have also been filed in support of petitioners seeking to strike down the law. Delhi-based NGO Hindu Shree Foundationwhich claims to represent the interests and rights of Hindu devotees both nationally and internationally, said the law was arbitrary and there was no justification for fixing a cut-off date of August 15, 1947. It said there was no rational connection existed between political independence and establishment of the Republic of India and the settlement of the civilizational conflict arising from the colonial eradication of Hindu identity and the imposition of cultural hegemony by Muslim invaders.
Former MP Chintamani Malviya also filed a petition claiming that the law itself was against secularism and should be abolished. “The law is void and unconstitutional for many reasons. It violates the rights of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs to pray, profess, practice and propagate religion. It deprives them of possession of religious properties belonging to the deity and misappropriated by other communities. Their right to legal remedies, the Center has violated its legislative power by banning remedies against judicial review, which are a basic feature of the Constitution. The solution cannot be taken away by the state,” he said.
In a joint plea filed by Ribeiro, Habibullah, ex-IFS officer Deb Mukharji and ex-IAS officer Kamal Kant Jaswal said the questions raised by the petitioners in the case stemmed from a “strong majority and anti-minority bias”, which is an anathema to the Constitution.
“The petition shows complete ignorance of history as it ignores the fact that rulers have demolished places of worship of subjugated dynasties and kingdoms in Indian history and among religious sects. Critical historical research shows that in the pre-Islam era, various situations of religious conflict existed between Buddhist, Jain and Hindu sects,” they said.
The joint application filed by Jung, Quraishi, Pillai and others stated: “This country has been the cradle of not only one of the oldest human civilizations, but also of several religions and religious denominations. It is also a fact that there have been struggles for supremacy and spread of religion throughout the history of this country. In the above circumstances, the law was enacted with the stated purpose of not allowing past acts/omissions of one or the other religious group to destroy the religion. fate of future generations and therefore the law is crucial for maintaining communal harmony and preventing conflicts that may arise from disputes involving historical features.