The Supreme Court on Thursday directed courts across the country not to entertain or pass orders in any new suits or pleas seeking surveys of mosques to determine whether temples exist beneath them.
The court further restrained lower courts from passing any orders in existing suits concerning such disputes, effectively putting a freeze on surveys pending further directions.
“No order of survey or any other effective order to be passed in existing suits as well,” the top court said while hearing on pleas challenging Places of Worship Act.
The Places of Worship Act, 1991 was enacted to preserve the religious character of all places of worship as they stood at the time of Independence, with an exception made only for the ongoing Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute in Ayodhya, which has since been resolved.
However, the current pleas contend that the Act violates the fundamental rights of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs to reclaim and restore their places of worship destroyed under historical invasions. The petitioners argue that the law restricts judicial recourse for reclaiming sites they believe to be of religious and historical significance.
The Supreme Court bench clarified on Thursday, “We are examining the vires, contours, and ambit of the 1991 law,” suggesting a detailed scrutiny of the Act's provisions in the coming hearings.
Context: The Sambhal Mosque case and others
The court's directive comes amid a spate of petitions filed in recent months across India, seeking archaeological surveys of mosques under claims that temples lie beneath them. A prominent example is the Sambhal mosque case in Uttar Pradesh, where a local court was hearing a plea seeking an ASI (Archaeological Survey of India) survey of the Teely Wali Masjid. The petitioners claim that the mosque stands on the ruins of an ancient temple dedicated to Lord Shiva.
The case in Sambhal mirrors the controversy surrounding the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah mosque in Mathura, where similar petitions alleging the existence of Hindu temples beneath mosque structures have led to legal and communal tensions. In the Sambhal dispute, the local court had been considering a survey request before the Supreme Court's order effectively put a halt to such proceedings nationwide.
The Supreme Court’s balancing act
The apex court's intervention is being viewed as an attempt to prevent a proliferation of litigation that could lead to communal disharmony. By freezing new and ongoing suits, the court has ensured that no fresh surveys can be ordered while it deliberates on the broader constitutional questions surrounding the Places of Worship Act.
Legal experts suggest that the Supreme Court's decision will have significant implications for ongoing disputes. “The court’s intervention signals caution against further surveys, which could create tensions, while also ensuring that the larger constitutional questions around the Act are carefully addressed,” a senior advocate remarked.
Implications and the road ahead
The issue remains sensitive, particularly in Uttar Pradesh, where disputes like Sambhal, Mathura, and Varanasi have emerged as flashpoints. The Supreme Court’s eventual ruling on the Places of Worship Act could potentially reshape the legal framework governing disputes over religious sites.
As the court examines the petitions, the question of balancing historical grievances with the Act’s stated purpose—to preserve communal harmony and status quo—remains at the heart of the debate. The next hearing on the matter is awaited, with all eyes on how the court interprets the constitutional validity and ambit of the 1991 legislation.