Answer

The judiciary plays a critical role in resolving disputes over religious places while safeguarding the principles of secularism, equality, and justice enshrined in the Indian Constitution. However, this task is fraught with challenges such as balancing historical claims with contemporary rights, maintaining public order, addressing emotional sensitivities, and ensuring adherence to legal frameworks like the Places of Worship Act, 1991. These complexities demand a careful and impartial approach to uphold constitutional values.

Enroll now for UPSC Online Course

Challenges Faced by the Judiciary in Addressing Disputes over Religious Places 

• Ambiguity in Legal Framework: While the Places of Worship Act, 1991 aims to freeze the status of religious places as of 1947, its provisions leave room for differing interpretations, weakening its enforcement.
  For example: The Allahabad High Court, in 2022, allowed suits like Gyanvapi Mosque, interpreting the Act as permitting surveys to determine religious character.
• Rekindling Historical Conflicts: Revisiting centuries-old grievances risks inflaming communal tensions, disrupting public order, and undermining social cohesion.
• Influence of Political Polarization: Judicial verdicts in religious disputes often become tools for political mobilization, challenging the judiciary’s ability to maintain neutrality.
• Maintaining Secular Neutrality: Balancing religious rights with the secular ethos of the Constitution is a significant challenge, especially when judgments are perceived as favoring one community.
• Proliferation of Legal Precedents: Allowing cases involving disputed religious sites undermines the Act’s core principle, creating a precedent for future conflicts over places of worship.

Ensuring Adherence to Constitutional Principles

• Protection of Secularism: The judiciary often balances competing religious claims to uphold the secular character of the Constitution (Article 25–28).
  For example: In S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994), the Supreme Court declared secularism as a basic feature of the Constitution, reinforcing the State’s impartiality in religious matters.
• Enforcement of Fundamental Rights: It ensures religious freedom (Article 25) does not violate the rights of others or public order.
• Balancing Historical and Religious Claims: Courts examine disputes over religious places through historical records and evidence, focusing on constitutional principles over religious sentiments.
  For example: In the Ayodhya dispute (M. Siddiq v. Mahant Suresh Das, 2019), the Supreme Court relied on historical and archaeological evidence to deliver a balanced verdict while allocating alternate land for the affected party to uphold fairness.
• Preservation of Cultural and Heritage Sites: The judiciary safeguards religious structures recognised as cultural or heritage sites, ensuring constitutional compliance.
  For example: In Aruna Roy v. Union of India (2002), the Court emphasised the promotion of composite culture under Article 51A(f), relevant in disputes over heritage religious places.
• Ensuring Due Process: Courts adjudicate religious disputes with procedural fairness, ensuring that all parties are heard without prejudice.
  For example: In the Gyanvapi Mosque-Kashi Vishwanath Temple dispute, the judiciary has stressed procedural adherence in the collection and evaluation of evidence, ensuring fair trial principles

Check Out UPSC CSE Books From PW Store

In navigating disputes over religious sites, the judiciary must act as a guardian of the Constitution, ensuring that secularism and communal harmony remain paramount. By reinforcing the principles of the Places of Worship Act, delivering timely and fair judgments, and promoting conflict resolution mechanisms, the judiciary can build public trust and prevent historical grievances from disrupting societal peace. A future-oriented approach that safeguards the secular fabric of India is crucial to maintaining unity in its diverse, pluralistic society.

DOWNLOAD PDF