The judgment emphasizes equality for the Muslim minority, reaffirming constitutional protections and discouraging divisive politics over religious identity.
Adv. Mehwish Hilal
The Supreme Court of India recently passed an important judgment honouring the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. This ruling has deeper ramifications in the context of the protection of the nation’s communal harmony, secularism, and the basic constitutional values. According to the Act, it is declared that the religious character of all places of worship shall be maintained as it existed on 15th August 1947.
The Act was first enacted with the aim of safeguarding the secular character of the country while achieving some degree of communal harmony at a time when the late 1980s to the early 1990s witnesses a flurry of activities geared towards communalism. However, over time this law has been subjected to legal attempts to challenge its validity which in turn brought into the centre stage the issues of history the law intended to protect.
Court led by Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna dismissed these contentions stressing that the Act is an aspect in the promises made towards the constitution especially with respect to the secularism and equality. The Court pointed out that the settlement of inter faith disputes is necessary since allowing inter faith disputes to simmer may result in soreness between communities and even threaten the cohesion of the entire country.
This judgment also covered how a number of efforts to question the Act attempted to make religion a basis for action to create fissures among Hindus and Muslims. The latter were perceived as straight infringements of constitutional mandates concerning fraternity and brotherhood amongst citizens. Justice Khanna said that such faction-creating attempts were violation of the nation’s spirit and may even end an age of co-existence and common heritage which went through so many centuries.
The Court emphasized that secularism is not only a policy but rather a fundamental principle of the Constitution. It protects every faith and makes sure religious diversity does not become an avenue for social discord. The Court, through this verdict, reaffirmed its pledge to make historical wrongs not available for political or social exploitation.
The judgment impacts current cases, including very prominent ones such as Gyanvapi mosque-Kashi Vishwanath temple and Krishna Janmabhoomi in Mathura. The Court clarified that the matters of national unity should not be judged from the perspective of historical wrongs. It issued a moratorium on conducting surveys and taking legal actions over disputed places to maintain peace until its judgment is put into action.
Expert Opinion: Advocate Ashok Arora
Advocate, Ex Secretary Supreme Court Bar Association, Ashok Arora has come in full support of this decision, terming it as a landmark judgment that revives faith in the judiciary. Adv. Arora said, “Justice Sanjeev Khanna has erased the mistakes of past interpretations and reinforced constitutional laws.” He, in particular, criticized the observations made by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud in the Babri Masjid case, which, he said, opened the door for surveys on disputed sites and contravened the spirit of the Places of Worship Act.
While acknowledging Chandrachud’s legacy of delivering remarkable judgments, Adv. Arora pointed out that this particular instance demonstrated that even eminent judges could misstep. “Justice Sanjeev Khanna has corrected that course and set a new benchmark,” he added. Quoting Mahatma Gandhi, Arora said, “Use your profession as a tool to serve,” lauding Justice Khanna’s adherence to his oath and constitutional values.
He further enlarged his appreciation to the bench as a whole, to Justices P.V. Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan- “The captain is as good as the team, and the team is as good as the captain,” he would say, emphasizing the synergy of the decision.
Adv. Arora further said that this verdict is the turning point of democracy, judiciary, and the common man. He added, “Good begun is half done,” that means this interim judgment lays down a foundation for harmony in the future. He further appreciated the bench for respecting the constitutional mandate of universal brotherhood, which is the very idea of India.
In his final words, Arora had declared passionately, “Jab tak suraj chand rahega, Justice Sanjeev Khanna ka naam rahega,” which encapsulated the enduring impact of this judgment. He emphasized such decisions strengthen public trust in the judiciary and uphold India’s secular ethos.
The Supreme Court, by upholding the Places of Worship Act, has given a strong message that the principles of the Constitution are paramount. It reaffirmed that unity and brotherhood cannot be compromised for agendas. This decision marks a crucial step in safeguarding India’s secular identity and ensuring that religious differences do not erode the nation’s communal harmony.
It’s testimony to the role of the judiciary in protecting the values enshrined in the Constitution and fostering unity with the idea of “India for all.” Challenges continue, but the judgment is a legal and moral framework to approach them constructively.
