The dispute over Varanasi, Mathura mosques

• The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, is back in the spotlight due to civil suits challenging the religious character of mosques in Varanasi and Mathura.
• Hindu claimants are making determined legal efforts to replace these mosques with temples.
• These developments show that legislation freezing the status of places of worship is inadequate.

Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991

• The Act was enacted in 1991 during the Babri-Masjid Ram Janmabhoomi dispute to freeze the status of places of worship as of August 15, 1947.
• Its main features include maintaining the religious character as of that date, prohibiting conversion of places of worship, and abating pending proceedings.
• Exceptions include ancient monuments covered by the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, settled disputes, and conversions by acquiescence.

Gyanvapi Mosque Cases

• In Varanasi, a 2022 suit by Hindu women claims the right to worship deities in the Gyanvapi mosque.
• Another batch of suits from 1991 seeks to declare part of the mosque site as belonging to Lord Vishweshwar.
  • The basis is that a temple was allegedly demolished on the order of Emperor Aurangzeb in 1669.
• So far, court orders have favoured the suits, with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) finding evidence of a pre-existing temple.
• Subsequently, the court has allowed the conduct of Hindu prayers in the premises, contested by the mosque committee.

Shahi Idgah Mosque Cases

• The suites in Mathura pertain to the Shahi Idgah mosque that stands adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi Temple there.
• These suits claim that the mosque was built over the birthplace of Lord Krishna.
• The dispute was settled through a compromise in 1968; the Sansthan gave up a portion of the land to the Idgah.
• The current suits challenge this compromise as ‘fraudulent’ and seek the transfer of the entire parcel of land to the deity.
• The Allahabad High Court has transferred to itself all suits pertaining to the Mathura dispute.

Places of Worship Act's Bar on Lawsuits

• Both mosque committees argued that the Places of Worship Act bars these suits, but court rulings state otherwise.
• In the Gyanvapi case, the Act does not bar suits as they assert the right of worship of the Hindu deities without converting the status of the mosque.
• The Allahabad High Court, in the earlier batch of suits, ruled that evidence, and not the Act, determines ‘religious character’.
• In Mathura, the district court holds that the Act doesn't bar suits challenging the 1968 agreement as it predates the commencement of the 1991 Act.