Former Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, is facing increasing political criticism for his decision last year to allow an ASI survey at the Gyanvapi mosque complex in Varanasi, a move that critics argue has sparked a wave of similar surveys at religious sites across the country.
Political Backlash and Criticism
The All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and MPs from the Samajwadi Party have expressed their discontent, accusing Chandrachud of “softening” the judiciary’s stance on the 1991 Places of Worship Act, which prohibits changing the status of religious sites as they existed on August 15, 1947. The AIMPLB stated that the decision to allow the Gyanvapi survey violated this law and set a dangerous precedent for future cases.
SP MPs Zia Ur Rehman Barq and Mohibbullah Nadvi criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling, calling it a “bad decision” that opened the door for more surveys, leading to religious tensions across India. “The SC must take cognizance and stop such petitions and surveys in the country’s interest,” they added.
Controversial Consequences: Sambhal and Ajmer
Since the Gyanvapi decision, surveys have been initiated at several other sites, including the Shahi Eidgah mosque in Mathura, Teelewali Masjid in Lucknow, and now the Jama Masjid in Sambhal and Ajmer Sharif. This chain of events has brought further attention to the role of lower courts in approving such petitions. Senior SP leader Ram Gopal Yadav argued that only the Supreme Court and High Courts should handle these sensitive issues, warning that lower court decisions could incite religious unrest.
Imran Masood of the Congress also raised concerns about the purpose of these surveys, questioning why they were being conducted if the character of religious sites cannot be altered according to the 1991 Act. AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi echoed similar sentiments, pointing out that the surveys seemed to exacerbate communal tensions without any clear legal outcome.
Defending the Legal Standpoint
On the other side, proponents of the surveys, like Vishnu Shankar Jain, argue that the 1991 Act does not apply to sites protected by the ASI. He pointed to Section 4 of the Act, which does not prevent surveys of ASI-protected monuments. Jain emphasized that the Sambhal Jama Masjid, being an ASI-protected site, falls under a different legal framework and should be subject to a survey.
Jain also cited the Ancient Monuments Act of 1950, which grants the ASI authority to determine the religious character of monuments. His arguments have pushed for a survey at the Sambhal Jama Masjid and for Hindus to be granted access for prayer at the site.
The Gyanvapi Decision and Its Fallout
The controversy began in August 2023, when a bench led by Chandrachud allowed a scientific survey by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) at the Gyanvapi mosque, despite objections from the Muslim side, which argued it contravened the Places of Worship Act. The Supreme Court ruled that while Section 3 of the Act bars the change in religious character, it did not prevent ascertaining the religious identity of a site.
This judgment paved the way for subsequent surveys, including the one at the Shahi Eidgah in Mathura, and ongoing legal battles over the status of other religious sites like the Bhojshala monument in Madhya Pradesh.
Ongoing Legal and Political Ramifications
The legal battles are far from over, with the Supreme Court recently staying trial court proceedings in the Sambhal case and ordering that the survey report be kept sealed. As the issue continues to unfold, the debate over the application of the Places of Worship Act and the role of judicial decisions in these matters remains a key point of contention.
This news report is curated with insights from multiple reliable news sources.
