Challenge the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship Act and it’s denying “Secularism”, the bedrock on which India stands, say some people. Very recently, the Supreme Court ruled that secularism will stay in the Constitution of India no matter what and cannot be removed come rain or shine, or the services of the best law firm in the country, with the brightest of lawyers in the building.

Now, the Supreme Court was scheduled to hear a batch of petitions challenging the “constitutional validity" of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. With ‘Ajmer Sharif Dargah’ fresh in mind and the ‘Sambhal Shahi Jama Masjid’ part of heated discussions, there couldn’t be a more apt time to hear these petitions.

People want closure. Hindu people and Muslim people and a bunch of Muslim people are arguing that the “Buddha people” should also ask for surveys of Hindu temples to unearth “Buddha Viharas” buried deep under Hindu temples.

Is it the height of meanness – go to any extent to avenge and revenge? The Places of Worship Act, 1991 was brought in the first place to keep the peace between Hindu and Muslim. But to ask the Buddhist also to jump into the cauldron to slight the Hindu, is that a friendly gesture or sowing discord?

A bench of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar were to hear the batch of petitions – six in all – including one by the World Bhadra Pujari Purohit Federation and another by Dr. Subramanian Swamy. There is also one by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay and yet another by the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, the lone petitioner in support of the Places of Worship Act.

The Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind wanted an early hearing. The Muslims of India are the most eager to keep peace with the Places of Worship Act. Is there something very medieval about this urge? The Ayodhya Ram Mandir was kept out of the purview of the Places of Worship Act, 1991 but this didn’t stop Muslims like AIMIM Chief Asaduddin Owaisi to assert that the Babri Masjid will "be retaken".

The latest dispute is about the survey conducted by a court commissioner at the historic Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh. The Places of Worship Act, 1991, prohibits the conversion of any place of worship and mandates the maintenance of the religious character of a place of worship as it stood on August 15, 1947. The Act was challenged in the Supreme Court by Hindus in 2020. Later, in 2022, the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind filed its own petition supporting the Act.

Question is, why should "Secularism" be linked to the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act? Worldwide, there is acceptance that it is alright for "peoples" to ask for their heritage buildings, including places of worship, like temples and churches, to be traced, unearthed, returned and rebuilt. And this has got nothing to do with "Secularism", which needs no crutches.

The Places of Worship Act, 1991, is perhaps the only such law anywhere in the world. And enough has been written and spoken against it; most of all about the discrimination it has sown in a naturally secular country like India. For a 1000 years India was not secular by any sense of the term and during this period of religious fanaticism, the character of tens of hundreds of places of worship were forcibly changed, with no court to thwart the designs of the evil ones.

The fact is, there is no difference between that age and this age, which is supposedly modern. That the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which is biased and discriminatory to its core, even draconian beyond belief, is tolerated is a travesty and the height of hubris. What was the then Prime Minister of India thinking when he imposed this law on a section of the people of India, giving another section reason to smile?

The Places of Worship Act, 1991 is an anachronism. It should have no place in the Constitution of India. BR Ambedkar never thought up such a law. He would have been horrified if anybody had suggested such a regressive law. "As existed on August 15, 1947" cannot bar any citizen from approaching the court. The then Government of India took the law into its hands.

The top court now has the duty to correct the character of the Places of Worship Act, 1991, undo the discrimination embedded in the Act. No one group of Indians must be armed with a special privilege. The apprehension that the country will break into pieces is a threat! Former CJI DY Chandrachud said ascertaining the religious character of a place of worship was not barred by the Places of Worship Act.

The Supreme Court did not do any favours to the "Hindu Paksh" when it said in its judgment in the Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi case that the state had through the Places of Worship Act, 1991 "carried out its constitutional obligations to uphold secularism and the equality of all religions." In fact, the Supreme Court should now ensure the equality of all religions by doing away with everything that is discriminatory in the Act.

Better still, scrap the Act and do India, all of India, a favour. There won't be peace if this law remains and only one set of people gets a reason to smile. And if the Muslim goads Buddhists to go after "Buddha Viharas", too, that shows hypocrisy. Freeing India from the clutches of historical tyranny is not wrong. Moreover, it galls all right-thinking Indians, fiercely independent and born with a heightened sense of justice, to see injustice backed by a Law prevail! (IPA Service)