About Author
SAMEERA SR,5th year BA LL.B student, CSI Institute of Legal Studies Cheruvarakonam 
INTRODUCTION
The place of worship (special provisions act,1991) is enacted in the year 1991 when the issue of ram Janmabhoomi movement at its peak. It was enacted in the time of Naramsiha Rao’s congress administration. It is one of the act that to prevent the conversion of any place of worships and to provide for the maintenance of the religious character of place of worship.it is mainly aim to freeze the status of place of worship as on 1947 August 15. now the act has the popularity based on the AYODYH issue. Now let’s look about some of the brief fact about it in detail.
OVERVIEW OF THE ACT
It is one of the short piece of legislation having 8 sections. But this 8 section have significant value on its all dimensions. This aim to protect the place of worships conversion. This act is extended to whole of India . in the section 1 it state that section 3 ,6,and 8 shall come into operation on 11th July 1947.the soul and heart of the act, section 3, says that no person have the power to convert any place of worship of any religious denomination or sections into a place of worship of other. It bar the conversion of place of worships. Whoever contravene the provision is punishable under section 5 of the act. They are liable to imprisonment for a term extended to 3 years and fines. And the section also provide for punishment for the conspiracy to commit offences in section 3 and it punishable as acriminal conspiracy. Section 4 provided that the religious character of the place of worship remain same after the commencement of this act. And also the suit or appeal or other proceeding pending before the court, tribunal, other authority shall abate after the commencement of the act. This section have some exception regarding it. The cat doesn’t applies to following;
Any religious structure protected as an ancient historical monuments or archeological site or remain under any law.
Any suit or appeal or proceedings is disposed by the court, tribunal, any authority prior to the commencement of the act.
Any dispute between the parties settled before the act.
Any prior conversion happen with the approval of owner.
Any improvement or alteration made to the place of worship prior to the effective date of such Commencement
From the act the another important provision is that the act doesn’t apply to the Rama Janma Bhumi-Babri Masjid. Any suit or appeal or proceedings related to that cannot be bar by any section. Section 7 also empower to override other enactment.
CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE ACT
Another important thing we have to discuss is about the constitutional validity of the act. There are so many petition were filed before the court raising that it is violative of Article 14,15,21,25, 26,29 of the Constitution of India.
When we look deep into it we can find a recent case relating to the constitutional validity filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Upadhyay. In the plea he contented that the act is took away the rights to restore their places of worships which were destroyed by barbaric invaders. He also add in this that it also exclude the birthplace of Rama but not Lord Krishna, were both are the incarnation of Lord Vishnu and he contented it is arbitrary and irrational. He also said in the plea that the period from 1192 to 1947 the hindhu, sikkh, Buddhists are suffered. When the act is enacted they are bared from the judicial remedy to whip the barbaric acts. By considering the writ petition the Supreme court held that the contention raised in this petition was already answered in the case M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs v. Mahant Suresh Das
The first question in the writ petition filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay about the cut off date. In this regard in the M siddiq case the court upheld that by providing the cut off date it preserve the doctrine of non-retrogression. The doctrine say that the courts have already reasoned that any attempt to unravel the Act or any provisions enshrined therein shall result in the violation of the doctrine along with jeopardizing the secular character of the Constitution.
Second question dealing about the secular nature of the act. The petitioner argue that the section 3 of the act is violative of article 14,25,26. But in the siddiq case it is clearly pronounced that the intention of legislature is to protect the secular nature of constitution. And it is important to note that the act was enacted in the heat of Ayodhya case and it is essential to consider about the communal violence that happen around the situation. So the act not favour any particular religion so it is not violative of Article 25. Beside this ‘place of worship’ under section 2(c) include all place of worship of religion. So it also not violative of Article14.
Third argument relating to the restriction on the judicial remedy. Here the section 4(3)(e)of the act put restriction on approaching the High Court under Article 226 or the Supreme Court under Article 32 against the illegal encroachment on the place of worship which were converted after independence.
These are the main contention that raised in the case and the replay of the court regarding it. By the presently it is held that the place of worship Act,1991 is constitutionally valid. In regard to validity the Supreme Court ask the union government to express their stand on the act. On this July 1, 2023 the Supreme Court gave sufficient time to clarify its stand. After the clarification we get a steady stand relating to the act. But we have to understand from the various decision judiciary stand in the side of act.
PRESENT POSITION
In recently the act comes into the stage based on the Gynvapi mosque case. In the august, 2021 four hindus filed petition to get right to pray daily before Hindu idols on the outer walls of Gynvapi mosque. In response to the petition the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee, which manage the mosque argued that it is violative of place of worship act which gurantees the bar of conversion of place of worship from how it on the day of independence. The petition is an attempt to change the religious character of the mosque. In response to that the petitioner says that daily [prayer on the mosque was granted until 1993 thereafter it were permitted on specific day. So they battle for declaring the place of worships act null and void. In regard to the case the Varanasi court ordered the Archaeological Survey of India to conduct survey report on relating to mosque. In related to the mosque there are some petition were filed by the committee that challenge the civil suit seeking restoration of a temple at the mosque site. Last year it was rejected by the Allahabad high court. The court direct to complete the survey within six month. The ASI submitted report to the Varanasi court related to it. And it order to make the survey available to the public. the answer to the question relating to the act comes soon as possible then after we have correct stand.
CONCLUSION
By analyzing the above fact we have to understand that the act was a specific place in the history. As we know that our tradition was developed through different rulers. At that time so many temples, mosque were build. The people from there on practices from that day. It is common to raise a question relating to the monuments and which community is belonged by it. For avoiding such types of argument the Place of worship act was enacted. But the question comes into picture. Still the conflict between them is continued. To sought out the answer the survey is necessary. And after they come with the correct decision . but after that there is a chance oif arising the conflict in them.
REFFERENCE
https://images.app.goo.gl/X8eoan2GZgYakBcW
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/gyanvapi-mosque-case-raises-a-challenge-to-the-places-of-worship-act/article67783320.ece
Places of Worship Act continues to be operational despite challenge to its constitutional validity, says Supreme Court
https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/the-places-of-worship-act-1991
https://www.google.com/search?q=gynavapi+case+facts&oq=gynavapi+case+fa&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j33i10i160.10156j0j4&client=ms-android-oppo&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/gyanvapi-mosque-survey-varanasi-court-allows-all-parties-to-have-access-to-asi-report/article67772164.ece/amp/
