The Supreme Court has rejected a petition seeking to prevent the construction of mosques named after Mughal emperor Babur.
The Supreme Court has agreed to list for final hearing the pleas challenging the validity of certain provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
It will be heard by a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi.
Asserting that he prays regularly, the CJI said, "Believe me, if you have faith, God will always find a way."
The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear a batch of petitions challenging the validity of certain provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which prohibits lawsuits to reclaim a place of worship or change its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947. The pleas, including one filed by Ashwini Upadhyay, argue that these provisions violate the right to judicial remedy and create an arbitrary cut-off date. The matter will be heard in the backdrop of several ongoing cases related to places of worship, including the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah Mosque in Mathura. The Muslim side has cited the 1991 law to argue that such suits are not maintainable. The Supreme Court had previously sought the Centre's response to Upadhyay's petition, which alleged that the law creates an "arbitrary and irrational retrospective cut-off date" for maintaining the character of places of worship.
Remnants of demolished Hindu temples were used to build the Babri Masjid, Justice Dharam Veer Sharma of the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court has held and cited evidence provided by the Archeological Survey of India to support the findings.
Commencing hearing on pleas challenging the constitutionality of the Places of Worship Act, 1991, the Supreme Court asked the Centre to reply to cross-pleas against or seeking implementation of statute.
Justice Agarwal retired from the high court on April 23, 2020.
The law prohibits conversion of any place of worship and provides for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud on Monday said there was 'nothing wrong' in Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to his residence on Ganpati Puja and underscored the need for a 'sense of maturity in political sphere' on such issues.
The Mathura Shahi Masjid Eidgah Committee has approached the Supreme Court, requesting the court to prevent the central government from filing a response to a petition challenging the Places of Worship Act's constitutional validity. The committee accuses the BJP-led government of intentionally delaying its response. The court had previously issued a notice to the government in March 2021, but the government has yet to submit its reply despite numerous opportunities. The committee argues that the government's delay is intended to obstruct those opposing the challenge to the Places of Worship Act from filing their own responses. The petition also states that the pleas challenging the law's validity are scheduled for hearing on February 17, and closing the government's right to respond would serve justice. The Supreme Court previously issued a ruling in December 2022 that stopped courts from entertaining new lawsuits or issuing interim or final orders regarding the reclaiming of religious places, particularly mosques and dargahs. The ruling halted proceedings in 18 lawsuits filed by Hindu groups seeking surveys to confirm the original religious character of 10 mosques, including the Gyanvapi Masjid in Varanasi, the Shahi Idgah Masjid in Mathura, and the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal. This decision was made in response to six petitions, including one filed by lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay, challenging various provisions of the Places of Worship Act. The 1991 law prohibits the conversion of places of worship and guarantees the preservation of their existing religious character as it stood on August 15, 1947. Notably, the dispute regarding the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid in Ayodhya was excluded from this law. There are also several cross-petitions advocating for a strict enforcement of the 1991 law to uphold communal harmony and maintain the current status of mosques that Hindu groups seek to reclaim, claiming they were temples before being destroyed by invaders.
The Act prohibits conversion of any place of worship and provides for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947.
Samajwadi Party leader and Kairana MP Iqra Choudhary has moved the Supreme Court seeking effective implementation of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. This move comes amidst several petitions challenging the law's validity, including those filed by the Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti and lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay. The Supreme Court, in December 2022, had restrained all courts from examining fresh suits and passing interim orders in pending cases seeking to reclaim religious places. The Act aims to maintain the religious character of places of worship as they existed on August 15, 1947, but the dispute relating to Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid at Ayodhya was kept out of its purview. The court has listed Choudhary's plea with other pending pleas for February 17.
The Supreme Court of India has extended its stay on a court-monitored survey of the Shahi Idgah Mosque complex in Mathura, which is located adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple. The court deferred the hearing on a plea against the survey to April 1, while the interim order staying the survey will continue to operate. The Hindu side claims that the mosque complex holds signs of a temple that once existed at the site, while the Muslim side contends that the lawsuits filed by the Hindu litigants violate the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar also indicated that it may not take up the pending scheduled petitions, heard earlier by a three-judge bench, during the day as it was sitting in a combination of two judges.
Congress MP Mohammad Jawed and AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi have challenged the validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 in the Supreme Court, arguing that it violates constitutional provisions. The petitions claim the bill imposes arbitrary restrictions on Waqf properties and their management, undermining the religious autonomy of the Muslim community. They also allege that the bill discriminates against Muslims by imposing restrictions not present in the governance of other religious endowments. The bill was passed in the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha, with the petitioners arguing that it introduces limitations on the creation of Waqfs based on the duration of one's religious practice, mandates inclusion of non-Muslim members in Waqf administrative bodies, and shifts key administrative functions to government officials, thereby diluting the autonomy of Waqf management.
He alleged that the Congress was putting hurdles in the construction of a Ram temple in Ayodhya.
The senior advocate had on Tuesday told the court that the birth place of Lord Ram is also a deity and Muslims cannot claim right over the 2.77-acre disputed land in Ayodhya as any division of the property would amount to "destruction" and "mutilation" of the deity itself.
The Indo Islamic Cultural Foundation, which has been set up for the construction of the mosque, will build a mosque along with a hospital, library, community kitchen and research institute, on the land.
The plea contended that Parliament has no legislative competence to acquire land belonging to the state.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted time till October 31 to the Centre to file its response to a batch of pleas challenging certain provisions of a 1991 law that prohibits filing of a lawsuit to reclaim a place of worship or seek a change in its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947.
A four-member team from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) conducted a survey of the recently-discovered Shri Kartik Mahadev temple, five pilgrimage sites, and 19 wells in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, India. The survey followed the discovery of three damaged idols inside a well of the Bhasma Shankar temple, which was reopened after being shut for 46 years. The Shri Kartik Mahadev temple, also known as the Bhasma Shankar temple, was reopened on December 13 after authorities found the covered structure during an anti-encroachment drive. The temple houses an idol of Lord Hanuman and a Shivling and had remained locked since 1978. The district administration has requested carbon dating of the temple, including the well, from the ASI. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has restrained courts across India from entertaining new lawsuits or passing any orders in pending ones seeking to reclaim religious places, especially mosques and dargahs, until further notice. This action halts proceedings in approximately 18 lawsuits filed by Hindu parties seeking surveys to determine the original religious character of 10 mosques, including the Gyanvapi at Varanasi, the Shahi Idgah Masjid at Mathura, and the Shahi Jama Masjid at Sambhal, where four individuals died in clashes. The Supreme Court will examine the legality, scope, and boundaries of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which prohibits the conversion of places of worship and ensures the preservation of their religious character as it existed on August 15, 1947.
The Supreme Court of India will hear a plea from the mosque management committee challenging an order rejecting its petition in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh on January 15. The Allahabad High Court had rejected the mosque committee's plea, stating that the religious character of the Shahi Idgah mosque needed to be determined. The case involves claims that the mosque was built after the demolition of a temple, a claim disputed by the mosque committee. The Supreme Court will now decide on the maintainability of the mosque committee's plea.
He also said that now everyone should listen to RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat's advice to shun habit of fighting on small disputes.
The Hindu litigants claim the mosque holds signs suggesting that it was a temple once.
Criticising the high court verdict on partition of disputed land at Ayodhya and terming it 'strange', the apex court said that the partition of disputed land had "opened a litany of litigation.".
The Sunni Central Waqf Board is expected to file a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court on Tuesday, challenging the Allahabad high court verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suits.
Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh issued this statement on Thursday evening following the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court's verdict on the Ayodhya title suit case:
ASI submits report on Ayodhya excavation
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed the plea of a non-governmental organisation to intervene in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit.
The latest petitions have been filed by Akhil Bhartiya Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Samiti and one Farooq Ahmed challenging the high court judgement, which the apex court had dubbed as "strange" as none of the parties had demanded partition of the land.
The Hindu Mahasabha, one of the parties in the Ayodhya title suits, has filed an objection relating to the judgement of the Allahabad high court on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute.
In an interview, he recalled how Hashim Ansari, one of the original litigants in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, took him to the mosque on his bicycle.
The decision is based on the recommendations of an expert committee set up by the Centre and Uttar Pradesh government to review security arrangements at Ayodhya and the other three places following the terrorist strike.
The apex court has set October 18 as deadline for completion of all arguments in the protracted land title dispute, a move that has raised the possibility of a verdict in the politically sensitive case in the middle of November.
The Supreme Court will hear on April 5 a batch of PILs challenging the validity of certain provisions of a 1991 law that prohibits filing of a lawsuit to reclaim a place of worship or seek a change in its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947.
We had requested the government to make a law on construction of Ram Temple but the government did not do that, Thackeray said.
"This has to be deprecated. This is something which should not be happening," a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said.
The Uttar Pradesh government has given the allotment letter to the Sunni Waqf board for the land in Dhannipur village in Sohawal tehsil in Ayodhya on the Lucknow highway, about 18 km from the district headquarters, state government spokesperson Shrikant Sharma told reporters on Wednesday.
In an unusual coincidence, the two judges of a Supreme Court bench hearing a plea against the survey of the Gyanvapi-Shringar Gauri complex in Varanasi have had an association with a similar kind of dispute relating to the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri masjid issue as well.
© 2026 Rediff.com - Investor Information - Advertise with us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy - Sitemap - Feedback - About us - Terms of use - Grievances