Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board has moved the Supreme Court of India opposing challenges to the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

The Places of Worship Act 1991 has been challenged in a batch of petitions before the Supreme Court stating that "the Act has taken away the power of the Court and Religious Sects to restore their places of Worship". Notice was issued on one of the petitions in March 2021.

Also, Co-Mutawalli of Teeley Wali Masjid, a 350-year-old mosque in Lucknow has moved an application for intervention in the matter.

The instant application states, "The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 is a progressive legislation in keeping with the secular values of Indian polity and giving content to the right of every religious group to be treated equally by the State and enjoin the State to perform its functions as benevolent neutral in case of tensions between different religious groups."

"Therefore, the doctrine of non-retrogression applies with full vigor in upholding the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991," the application adds.

It further argues that all the issues raised by the PIL petitioner have already been answered by the apex court in M. Siddiq (Ram Janmabhumi Temple-5 J.) v. Suresh Das, the same being a unanimous decision of a bench constituted of five judges.

Also, the applicant submits that the law which is conceived for strengthening secularism and the maintenance of public order cannot be challenged on the ground that it violates the freedom of religion under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.

"Even in the field of criminal law when an offence is committed by an individual, State is the aggrieved party and has the right to launch the prosecution for such offence," AIMPLB adds.

In a similar plea, the provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 have been challenged stating that a mosque constructed on temple land cannot be a mosque.

Case Title: Ashwini Upadhyay vs. Union of India and Ors.