A petition difficult the constitutional validity of sure provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991 was filed earlier than the Supreme Court on Wednesday. The petitioner claimed that the Act “barefacedly violates the principles of secularism and rule of law”.
While difficult Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991, petitioner Swami Jeetendranand Saraswati argued that the stated provisions goes in opposition to the ideas of secularism and violates a number of basic rights reminiscent of Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29 of the Constitution.
The Places of Worship Act has taken centre stage as a number of instances relating to the ‘mandir vs masjid’ row, notably in Varanasi and Mathura, are being fought in a number of courts throughout the nation.
Section 4(1) of the Act is geared toward defending the non secular identification and character of locations of worship because it existed on the time of India’s Independence on August 15, 1947. Ram Mandir website in Ayodhya was one of many notable exceptions within the legislation that was handed by the Parliament again in 1991. Section 3 of the Act states that any non secular place or part of it can’t be transformed to a unique faith and even, a separate denomination inside the similar faith.
Section 4(2) of the Act clearly states that no appeals, fits or any authorized proceedings shall be entertained from the time the Act got here into impact. Fresh instances might solely be filed if the non secular character of anyplace of worship was modified after August 15, 1947 deadline. The Act additionally directed the State to take care of the non secular nature of all websites of worship because it existed on August 15, 1947. The Act additionally imposed a penalty that features jail time period of as much as 3 years together with a nice.
The petitioner stated that the stated sections have taken away the precise of the Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs to strategy the judiciary.
Source: www.financialexpress.com”