In one of the first implementations of the Supreme Court's recent directive, a local court in Uttar Pradesh's Jaunpur has refused to order a survey of the 14th century Atala Mosque.
Civil Judge Sudha Sharma declined on Monday to pass any orders on a plea filed by right-wing organisation Swaraj Vahini Association, which had claimed the mosque was originally a temple of Goddess Atala. The petition alleged the temple was demolished during the latter half of the 13th century after Feroz Tughlaq's invasion of India.
The Supreme Court had ordered an immediate halt to the registration of new cases challenging the ownership of religious sites, amid mounting concerns over communal tensions across the country.
The interim order, issued on 12 December 2024, by a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, also bars courts from passing any interim or final orders, including survey directives, in pending cases concerning places of worship.
The court's intervention comes at a crucial moment, as Hindu groups have filed multiple suits claiming ownership of medieval mosques and religious sites across India. Currently, 18 suits are pending against 10 mosques and shrines nationwide.
The order specifically addresses challenges to the Places of Worship Act 1991, which prohibits the conversion of any place of worship and mandates the maintenance of their religious character as it existed on 15 August 1947, India’s Independence Day.
Recent events have highlighted the urgency of the court’s decision. In November, a survey order against a 16th century mosque in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, triggered violence that resulted in four deaths. Similar disputes have emerged over prominent religious sites, including the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Eidgah Masjid in Mathura.
Christian leaders have welcomed the Supreme Court’s intervention. Father Robinson Rodrigues, spokesperson for the Catholic Bishops Conference of India, praised the order as “essential to maintain peace and harmony in society.”
“The court order has effectively helped the people of the minority communities to get rid of their anxieties over likely misuse of the 1991 law,” Rodrigues said. He emphasised that the law was originally enacted to restrict claims over pre-independence religious sites, as such disputes could trigger chaos in the country.
Pastor Joy Mathew, based in Uttar Pradesh, endorsed the court’s decision, stating to UCA News that “the order will help resolve many problems and also avoid further confrontation between religious communities.”
During the hearing, Justice K.V. Viswanathan noted that Section 3 of the Act “is a manifestation of constitutional principles,” emphasising that civil courts cannot compete with the Supreme Court in such matters.
The bench has directed the Union Government to file its counter-affidavit within four weeks, with the next hearing scheduled for February 17, 2025. Meanwhile, the Jaunpur court has scheduled its next hearing for March 2, 2025.
The interim order faced opposition from senior lawyers challenging the 1991 Act and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union government. However, Chief Justice Khanna remained firm, at one point indicating that if not allowed to pass the order in court, he would do so in chambers.
The Supreme Court’s intervention reflects growing concerns about religious tensions in India, particularly affecting its 210-million-strong Muslim minority. The order effectively puts a temporary hold on all religious site disputes until the court can thoroughly examine the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship Act.
