Legal Interpretations from Ayodhya Verdict Part 1
Jay Shree Ram!
These are some notes from Ayodhya Verdict regarding legal interpretations of certain statutory provisions:
Cultural assimilation is a
significant factor which shapes the manner in which religion is practiced. In
the plural diversity of religious beliefs as they are practiced in India,
cultural assimilation cannot be construed as a feature destructive of religious
doctrine. On the contrary, this process strengthens and reinforces the true
character of a country which has been able to preserve its unity by
accommodating, tolerating and respecting a diversity of religious faiths and
ideas.
Places of Worship (Special
Provisions) Act 1991
The law has been enacted to fulfil
two purposes. First, it prohibits the conversion of any place of worship. In
doing so, it speaks to the future by mandating that the character of a place of
public worship shall not be altered. Second, the law seeks to impose a positive
obligation to maintain the religious character of every place of worship as it
existed on 15
August 1947
when India achieved independence from colonial rule.
The law imposes two unwavering and
mandatory norms:
(i)
A bar is imposed by Section 3
on the conversion of a place of worship of any religious denomination or a
section of a denomination into a place of worship either of a different section
of the same religious denomination or of a distinct religious denomination. The
expression ‘place of worship’ is defined in the broadest possible terms to
cover places of public religious worship of all religions and denominations;
and
(ii)
The law preserves the religious character of every place of worship as it
existed on 15
August 1947. Towards
achieving this purpose, it provides for the abatement of suits and legal
proceedings with respect to the conversion of the religious character of any
place of worship existing on 15
August 1947. Coupled
with this, the Places of Worship Act imposes a bar on the institution of fresh
suits or legal proceedings. The only exception is in the case of suits, appeals
or proceedings pending at the commencement of the law on the ground that
conversion of a place of worship had taken place after 15
August 1947. The
proviso to sub-section (2) of
Section 4
saves those suits, appeals and legal proceedings which are pending on the date
of the commencement of the Act if they pertain to the conversion of the
religious character of a place of worship after the cut-off date. Sub-Section (3)
of
Section 4
however stipulates that the previous two sub-sections will not apply to:
(a)
Ancient and historical monuments or archaeological sites or remains governed by
Act 24 of 1958
or any other law;
(b)
A suit or legal proceeding which has been finally decided settled or disposed
of;
(c)
Any dispute which has been settled by the parties before the commencement of
the Act;
(d)
A conversion of a place of worship effected before the commencement of the Act
by acquiescence; and
(e)
Any conversion of a place of worship before the commencement of the Act in
respect of which the cause of action would be barred by limitation.
Section 5
stipulates that the Act shall not apply to Ram Janmabhumi – Babri Masjid and to
any suit, appeal or any proceeding relating to it. Consequently, there is a
specific exception which has been carved out by the provisions of the Places of
Worship Act in respect of the present dispute.
============================
Read more on Telegram Channel
===========================
Comments
Post a Comment