The PIL Challenging The Places Of Worship Act Is Irrational
By A Special Correspondent
First publised on 2021-03-16 02:40:13
About the Author
The history of a nation is the chronicle of what happened to it, and in it, in the past. Not all of it is rosy, neither is all devastating. But history is history and it has to be recorded truthfully for reminding generations to come about the good and bad of the nation. Any nation that does not keep its historical accounts truthfully or obliterates all records and destroys monuments of the past courts the danger of living in a fool's paradise and repeating its mistakes. If India keeps on renaming roads, cities et al on the excuse that they were named after conquerors, it seeks to change the fact that it was conquered. After a decade of two of such change, our future generations would come to believe that India was never conquered and had been supreme in every age, which is a falsehood no child should be taught. The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 (POWSP Act) was enacted to preserve our old places of worship, including those that were built by Muslim conquerors either from scratch or by allegedly or actually razing places of worship of Hinduism or other religions. The POWSP Act rightly chose 15th August 1947 as the cut-off date for the same as it was on that date that India became independent and whole (as opposed to being a geographical area comprising of small princely states and some large states consolidated by the English) and embarked upon a new destiny filled with hope that sought to kill past demons. It is another matter that two nations were carved out of the land (which became three in 1971), but there is no disputing the fact that India gained its true identity on that date.
What happened before that August date in 1947 was sought to be frozen by the POWSP Act as the government could see that a lot of questions would be raised on the character of some places of worship across India. The Ram Janmabhoomi case was already in the court and people were agitated about Mathura and Kashi. Other local places of worship would have been discovered in due time and cries for reversal of "historical wrongs" would have grown. To prevent such altercations from reaching boiling point, the then government enacted the POWSP Act following due process. The Act was widely discussed and passed by Parliament following due process. It was an act that sought to heal and preserve our heritage. But now, the Supreme Court has admitted a PIL that seeks to challenge the Act on flimsy grounds without raising questions about it being unconstitutional. This is a step in the wrong direction as it is likely to open a can of worms and flood the courts with cases that will seek to 'reclaim' places of worship citing the excuse of 'historical wrong'. The Supreme Court had praised the POWSP Act in its Ayodhya verdict. Then what was the need to admit the PIL which is irrational and based on a mistaken understanding of history and heritage? The nation had heard the slogan "Ayodhya toh jhanki hai, Kashi, Mathura baki hai" (Ayodhya is the trailer, Mathura (Krishna Janambhoomi) and Kashi (Vishwanath Mandir) are still left) when Babri masjid was being vandalized and temple politics was being played out with a vengeance. The POWSP Act is designed to stop such acts on part of vested interests. The Supreme Court must exercise extreme caution in these matters and chose to examine the validity of such Acts only if challenged on strong constitutional grounds. The PIL which has been admitted does not qualify on these grounds.
