Court’s order and the ASI survey are flawed

Source: The post is based on the article “Court’s order and the ASI survey are flawed” published in The Hindu on 4th September 2023.

Syllabus: GS 2 – Society- diversity of India & GS2 – Polity – judiciary

News: The author discusses the Supreme Court of India’s interpretation of the “Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991” in the Ram Janmabhoomi temple case and expresses concern about the recent Supreme Court decision allowing the Archaeological Survey of India to investigate the Gyanvapi mosque’s origins. The author fears this could set a precedent for questioning the historical origins of many religious sites in India, potentially causing religious tensions and disputes.

What is the constitutional basis for the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991?

Constitutional Basis for the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991:

Preamble’s Objective: The act aims to prevent the conversion of any place of worship and maintain its religious character as of August 15, 1947.

Defined by Supreme Court: The law addresses two primary concerns:

1. a) It bars the conversion of any place of worship, thereby addressing the future.
2. b) It mandates the upkeep of the religious nature of places as they were on India’s Independence Day.

Specific Exceptions: Only the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid is exempted from this mandate.

Upholding Constitutional Values: The act was described by the Supreme Court as protecting and upholding the core values of the Indian Constitution.

Healing Past Injustices: The act sees independence from colonial rule as a foundation to rectify past injustices, assuring every religious community of the protection of their places of worship.

What was the recent controversy?

In August 2023, the Supreme Court did not stop a decision allowing the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to study the Gyanvapi mosque.

The author questions the purpose of this study since the mosque’s religious nature has been established for centuries.

What are the implications of the recent Supreme Court decision on the Gyanvapi mosque?

Overlooked Precedent: The Supreme Court’s decision seemed to overlook the binding precedent set in the Ram Janmabhoomi temple case, especially one Justice Chandrachud was part of.

Potential Character Change: There’s an absolute bar against changing the mosque’s character. Any Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) inquiry into its nature challenges this principle.

Futility of the Inquiry: The mosque has been a worship place for Muslims for centuries. The purpose and potential outcome of the ASI survey are questioned.

State Obligations: The decision disregards obligations the act placed on the state and every citizen.

Cultural Harmony at Risk: With elections approaching, this decision can cause misgivings in minority communities.

Setting a Precedent: This might open a Pandora’s box where multiple sites could be questioned, further stirring religious tensions.