Questions that arise after Sambhal Order

Closure in the Places of Worship Act challenge will help bring clarity on disputes regarding sites of worship across India

- Utkarsh Anand

The Supreme Court's interim order in the Sambhal mosque dispute last week is emblematic of the delicate legal and communal landscape surrounding the spate of cases filed by Hindu litigants claiming sites currently housing mosques. While Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna took important steps to maintain peace and order, he decided to keep the petition pending rather than addressing the larger legal question posed by such suits.

As it stands, this approach appears to sidestep the need for urgent judicial clarity on the core issue—the applicability of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which freezes the religious character of places of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947. While directing the mosque committee to approach the Allahabad high court first, the CJI-led bench chose to retain the petition in the Supreme Court and scheduled the next hearing for January 6. This raises several practical and jurisprudential concerns.

For one, by relegating the matter to the high court, the top court has effectively ensured that any subsequent ruling by the high court will eventually be challenged, bringing the matter back to the Supreme Court. Given this inevitability, it is unclear why the Supreme Court chose to keep the petition alive when the plea will likely be rendered infructuous after the high court order.