No Interim or Final Orders in Ongoing Worship Site Cases Until Further Notice: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Halts Registration of New Suits Against Places of Worship Pending Further Orders

On Thursday, December 12, the Supreme Court issued a significant order prohibiting the registration of new suits concerning places of worship across the country until further notice. The directive aims to address the increasing number of legal disputes over religious sites.

The Court also restricted lower courts from passing effective interim or final orders, including survey orders, in ongoing cases such as those related to the Gyanvapi mosque, Mathura Shahi Idgah, and Sambhal Jama Masjid. This interim order was issued while hearing petitions challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

The Court's intervention follows heightened tensions triggered by disputes over medieval mosques and dargahs. Notably, a trial court's survey order for a 16th-century mosque in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, led to violence in November, resulting in four deaths.

While staying new registrations, the Court declined to halt proceedings in existing cases. The Union Government was directed to submit its counter-affidavit within four weeks, with instructions to upload the document online for public access.

The bench noted that 18 suits are currently pending against 10 places of worship. During the hearing, Justice Viswanathan remarked on the constitutional questions involved, stressing the importance of judicial consistency: 

Civil courts cannot run parallel to the Supreme Court. There must be a stay to maintain coherence in judicial processes.

The Places of Worship Act, 1991, prohibits altering the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947. The lead petition, filed by BJP leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay in 2020, challenges the Act's constitutional validity. Several similar petitions and a writ petition by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind seeking the Act's implementation were also heard.

Political parties, including CPI(M), DMK, and NCP, have intervened to support the Act. Despite repeated extensions, the Union Government has yet to file its response.

The Act has gained renewed attention following the violence in Sambhal. Advocates Kanu Agarwal, Vishnu Shankar Jain, and Ejaz Maqbool were appointed as nodal counsel to compile submissions from the Union, petitioners, and parties supporting the Act.

Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India and Others (WP(C) No. 1246/2020)

A special bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar, and Justice K.V. Viswanathan emphasized the need for judicial restraint. The bench stated: 

As the matter is sub-judice before this Court, we direct that while suits may be filed, no suits shall be registered or proceedings undertaken until further orders. In pending suits, no effective interim or final orders, including survey orders, should be passed until the next hearing.