Another plea filed challenging Places of Worship Act 1991 filed in SC
June 5, 2023
  • Circulation
  • Advertise
  • Careers
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Organiser
  • ‌
  • Bharat
  • World
  • G20
  • Editorial
  • Analysis
  • Opinion
  • Sports
  • More
    • Defence
    • RSS in News
    • Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav
    • My States
    • Vocal4Local
    • Business
    • Special Report
    • Culture
    • Sci & Tech
    • Entertainment
    • Education
    • Books
    • Interviews
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Obituary
    • Podcast
SUBSCRIBE
No Result
View All Result
  • ‌
  • Bharat
  • World
  • G20
  • Editorial
  • Analysis
  • Opinion
  • Sports
  • More
    • Defence
    • RSS in News
    • Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav
    • My States
    • Vocal4Local
    • Business
    • Special Report
    • Culture
    • Sci & Tech
    • Entertainment
    • Education
    • Books
    • Interviews
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Obituary
    • Podcast
No Result
View All Result
Organiser
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Bharat
  • World
  • G20
  • Editorial
  • Opinion
  • Analysis
  • Culture
  • Defence
  • RSS in News
  • My States
  • Vocal4Local
  • Subscribe
Home Bharat

Another plea filed challenging Places of Worship Act 1991 filed in SC

The plea filed by Rudra Vikram Singh, resident of Varanasi, challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991.

WEB DESK by WEB DESK
May 26, 2022, 02:58 pm IST
in Bharat
Representative Image

Representative Image

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterTelegramEmail

New Delhi [India]: One more plea challenging the Constitutional validity of certain sections of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991, saying that the Act violates the principles of secularism, was filed in the Supreme Court on Thursday (May 26).

The plea filed by Rudra Vikram Singh, resident of Varanasi, challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991.

According to Vikram’s plea, the said sections offend Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, and 29 and violate the principles of secularism and the rule of law, which are an integral part of the Preamble and the basic structure of the Constitution.

“It is respectfully submitted that the Central Government, by making impugned provision (Places of Worship Act 1991) in the year of 1991 has created arbitrary irrational retrospective cut off date, declared that character of places of worship and pilgrimage shall be maintained as it was on August 15 1947 and no suit or proceeding shall lie in the court in respect to the dispute against encroachment done by barbaric fundamentalist invaders and such proceeding shall stand abated,” the PIL stated.

Yesterday on Wednesday, another plea was filed by a religious leader, Swami Jeetendranand Saraswati, against the 1991 Act.

That plea said that Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Act have taken away the right to approach the Court, and thus the right to judicial remedy has been closed.

Section 3 of the Act bars the conversion of places of worship. It states, “No person shall convert any place of worship of any religious denomination or any section thereof into a place of worship of a different section of the same religious denomination or of a different religious denomination or any section thereof.”

Section 4 bars filing any suit or initiating any other legal proceeding for a conversion of the religious character of any place of worship, as existing on August 15, 1947.

“The Places of Worship Act 1991 is void and unconstitutional for many reasons,” the plea said, adding that it offends the right of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs to pray, profess, practice, and ‘prorogate’ their religion (Article 25).

“The Act infringes on the rights of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs to manage, maintain and administer the places of worship and pilgrimage (Article 26),” it added.

Both the pleas further stated that the Act further deprives Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs of owning/acquiring religious properties belonging to their deity (misappropriated by other communities). “It also takes away right of judicial remedy of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs to take back their places of worship and pilgrimage and the property which belong to the deity,” the pleas added.

“The Act further deprives Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs to take back their places of worship and pilgrimage connected with cultural heritage (Article 29) and it also restricts Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs to restore the possession of places of worship and pilgrimage but allows Muslims to claim under Section 107, Waqf Act,” it said.

The petition further stated, “The Act legalises the barbarian acts of invaders. It violates the doctrine of Hindu law that ‘Temple property is never lost even if enjoyed by strangers for years and even the king cannot take away property as the deity is the embodiment of God and is juristic person, represents ‘Infinite the timeless’ and cannot be confined by the shackles of time.”

The plea, therefore, sought direction to declare that Section 2, 3 and 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 is void and unconstitutional for being violative of Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29 of the Constitution of India so far as it legalises ‘the ancient historical and puranic places of worship and pilgrimage’, illegally occupied by foreign invaders. (ANI)

 

Topics: Places of Worship Act 1991
Share1TweetSendShareSend
Previous News

10 arrested in J-K for ‘anti-national sloganeering’, stone-pelting outside Yasin Malik’s home

Next News

UP CM Adityanath lauds Rs 400 cr budget proposal for defence corridor in Bundelkhand

Related News

Uniform Civil Code: AIMPLB passes resolution against UCC, calls it ‘unnecessary’

Uniform Civil Code: AIMPLB passes resolution against UCC, calls it ‘unnecessary’

States Can Declare Hindus Minority if Hindus are Less in Numbers, Union Govt Tells Supreme Court

Mega litigation: Supreme Court likely to hear a plea on Kashi temple-Gyanvapi structure

Comments

The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Organiser. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.

Latest News

Singapore: India joins the world’s spy chief meet in secret conclave at Shangri-La Dialogue

Singapore: India joins the world’s spy chief meet in secret conclave at Shangri-La Dialogue

Auto Draft

NIPUN Bharat Mission: Yogi govt to make people aware of initiatives in the field of education

Odisha Train Tragedy: After Gautam Adani, Virender Sehwag to provide free education for children of deceased victims

Odisha Train Tragedy: After Gautam Adani, Virender Sehwag to provide free education for children of deceased victims

NCERT: Logic of deleting Darwinism

NCERT: Logic of deleting Darwinism

Damoh Controversy: Urdu compulsory for students & books filled with Islamic text; 3 teachers converted post-appointment

Damoh Controversy: Urdu compulsory for students & books filled with Islamic text; 3 teachers converted post-appointment

World Environment Day 2023: Unsustainable Model of Westernisation​

World Environment Day 2023: Unsustainable Model of Westernisation​

Operation Blue Star Anniversary: After Punjab, pro-Khalistan & Bhindranwale posters raised outside a Gurudwara in Delhi

Operation Blue Star Anniversary: After Punjab, pro-Khalistan & Bhindranwale posters raised outside a Gurudwara in Delhi

Plastic-Free Ramgarh: The inspiring story of Upendra Pandey and his wife

Plastic-Free Ramgarh: The inspiring story of Upendra Pandey and his wife

Kuki-Chin Resurgence in Chittagong Hill Tracts: A new threat to regional security

Kuki-Chin Resurgence in Chittagong Hill Tracts: A new threat to regional security

Is Adar Poonawala on a routine business trip to London, did the media hyped about ‘threats’?

Bombay HC directs two influencers to take down defamatory posts against Covishield manufacturer & CEO Adar Poonawala

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Cookie Policy
  • Refund and Cancellation
  • Delivery and Shipping

© Bharat Prakashan (Delhi) Limited.
Tech-enabled by Ananthapuri Technologies

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Bharat
  • World
  • Editorial
  • Analysis
  • Opinion
  • Defence
  • Culture
  • Sports
  • Business
  • RSS in News
  • My States
  • Vocal4Local
  • Special Report
  • Sci & Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Education
  • Books
  • Interviews
  • Travel
  • Health
  • Obituary
  • Podcast
  • Subscribe
  • Advertise
  • Circulation
  • Careers
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Refund and Cancellation

© Bharat Prakashan (Delhi) Limited.
Tech-enabled by Ananthapuri Technologies