The Wire Staff 
New Delhi: The Congress on Thursday, January 16, voiced strong support for the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, in the Supreme Court, defending the law as vital for maintaining communal harmony and upholding secularism in India.
The Act, introduced during the Congress-led government of P.V. Narasimha Rao, prohibits the conversion of a religious site into one of another faith and aims to preserve the religious character of places of worship as they stood on August 15, 1947. Congress general secretary K.C. Venugopal, through an intervention application, stated that the law “reflected the mandate of the Indian populace,” the Telegraph reported.
The Act under challenge
The 1991 Act is facing legal scrutiny after Hindu petitioners, led by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, challenged its constitutionality. They argue that the law restricts Hindus’ rights to reclaim religious sites allegedly converted by force in the past, effectively endorsing historical vandalism by invaders.
Section 3 of the Act prohibits the conversion of any place of worship to a different faith, while Section 4 mandates the preservation of its religious character as of 1947, excluding the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya.
The petitions challenging the law are set to be heard by a Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna on February 17.
Congress defends the law
Congress’s application, filed through advocate Abishek Jebraj, argued that the Act “is essential to safeguard secularism in India and the present challenge appears to be a motivated and malicious attempt to undermine established principles of secularism.” It warned that any dilution of the law “could jeopardise India’s communal harmony and secular fabric thereby threatening the sovereignty and integrity of the nation.”
The Congress’s application described the petitions as having “oblique and questionable motives” and emphasised that the 1991 Act is essential for protecting religious freedom and promoting secularism in India. The Congress also cited the Supreme Court’s landmark 2019 Ayodhya verdict, which upheld the validity of the 1991 Act.
Other organisations, including Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, the Indian Union Muslim League and the management committee of the Shahi Masjid Eidgah in Mathura, have also opposed the petitions challenging the Act. Civil rights activists have similarly argued that the law was enacted to maintain communal harmony and prevent historical grievances from unsettling the country’s future.