Courts are attacking the identity of Muslims by ordering surveys of mosques.

Courts are attacking the identity of Muslims by ordering surveys of mosques. : The responsibility for the murder of Muslims in Sambhal lies with the Indian judiciary. Views shared in the late Gulzar Azmi lecture, by Bombay High Court lawyers.

 

The third Late Gulzar Azmi Legal Lecture, titled “Attacks on Muslim Places of Worship by the Judiciary: Causes, Consequences, and Prevention,” was organized by the Innocence Network at the Goldfield English High School in the Govandi area of Mumbai. The event was attended by lawyers and the public. In her speech on the topic, Advocate Bhagyashah kurne a Bombay High Court lawyer and human rights activist, stated that the Places of Worship Act 1991 is a significant law for India because the country does not have an official state religion, making it the government’s responsibility to protect places of worship of all religions. This law was enacted to ensure that no place of worship is harmed in any way. She added that according to this law, even a single mosque or temple cannot be converted into another sect’s mosque or temple, rather then converting a mosque into a temple. Despite the Places of Worship Act, the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, D Y Chandrachud, has unjustly ordered a survey of Gyanvapi mosque, she argued. She further pointed out that civil court cases regarding property matter often drag on for decades because courts do not have time to hear cases, yet in the case of a petition claiming a temple is under a mosque, the court acts immediately and orders a survey, this is the first attack on Muslims’ mosques by the judiciary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

She added that similar violations have occurred with Buddhist temples in Ajanta and Ellora. She warned that if surveys are ordered everywhere, the consequences are unpredictable. Such survey orders could lead to riots and deaths, and if this happens, will the courts take responsibility? Recently, in the Sambhal Shahi Jama Masjid, riots and deaths have already occurred.

 

What is the Places of Worship Act? Understanding Its Significance and Ongoing Controversies

 

Advocate Pritha Paul’s Criticism of the Judiciary

The judiciary’s actions amount to an attack on the identity of Muslims.
The Babri Masjid exclusion from the Places of Worship Act of 1991 has fueled controversies and undermined the law.
Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s decisions contradict the spirit of the law, enabling disputes through surveys.
The courts must address the constitutional validity of the Worship Act instead of prioritizing petitions that harm religious harmony.

 

In the lecture, Advocate Pritha Paul, a Bombay High Court lawyer and social activist working for prisoners’ rights, said that this is not just a land issue, but an attack on the identity of Muslims. Those responsible for this have the full support of the government, and the courts are complicit in this. While the Constitution says the judiciary is independent, this is not the case in practice. She raised the question of why the Babri Masjid was excluded from the Places of Worship Act of 1991, which opened a new chapter of controversy, even though the Babri Masjid was a 15th-century mosque. She noted that the decision regarding Babri Masjid was shameful, but those who made the error were favored in the ruling. She questioned why surveys were being conducted and why the courts were easily granting permission for such surveys. She asked whether anyone is preparing for an exam or working on a research paper through these surveys, and why Justice Chandrachud made such a decision that altered the meaning of the law. She warned that once surveys are conducted, questions regarding the status of the building will follow. After Justice Chandrachud’s order, survey applications have surged.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

She emphasized that religious places of one community are being attacked, and that despite the pending petition on the constitutional status of the Worship Act, Justice Chandrachud did not address it but instead ordered surveys. The killings in Sambhal are the responsibility of the court. Courts do not understand the serious consequences of their orders, which negatively affect ordinary people. She stated that to prevent such disputes, awareness needs to be raised, and programs should be held everywhere. We need to speak out, write, and question the courts. Judges need to be sent letters asking why they are active in cases that worsen the situation and hurt the religious sentiments and rights of one community. She raised the question of what would happen if the court declared this law unconstitutional. “Think, speak, write, and continue organizing programs. Do not remain silent.”

 

New Laws Overturn Landmark Supreme Court Decisions: Advocate Faisal Qazi Highlights Legal Challenges

 

Advocate Mahir Desai’s Absence

 

Due to personal issues, Advocate Mahir Desai, a senior lawyer from the Bombay High Court, could not attend the program.

In the case of the Gyanvapi Mosque, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud allowed the survey, saying it would not alter the mosque’s structure, but later, based on the survey report, there are concerns that the entire mosque may be turned into a temple.

 

Advocate Pritha Paul’s Perspective

The judiciary’s actions are an attack on Muslim identity, supported by the government.
The Babri Masjid exclusion from the Places of Worship Act opened controversies.
Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s decisions contradicted the principles of the Worship Act.
The judiciary must address the constitutional status of the Worship Act rather than enabling surveys.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advocate Wajid Shaikh, in his speech, discussed the allegations against Indian Muslims, claiming that Mughal rulers had destroyed temples to build mosques. He questioned why, if the Mughal emperors had control over all the land in the country, they would destroy temples to build mosques, which Islam does not permit and Muslims do not favor. He noted that if the Mughal rulers had ordered the destruction of temples, there would not be a single temple left in the country today. Referring to the Babri Masjid case, he pointed out that Justice Chandrachud had referred to the Places of Worship Act 1991 in his judgment, praising it, but later, by ordering surveys, he undermined that very law. He quoted poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz, suggesting that the current situation of judges serving in high positions after the Babri decision is reflective of the moral decay.

 

The Legal Profession: A Pathway to Justice and Compassion for Aspiring Lawyers -2024

 

He pointed out that Justice Abdul Nazeer, who was part of the Babri Masjid decision, was later made the Governor of Andhra Pradesh, and Justice Ranjan Gogoi was made a member of the Rajya Sabha. Similarly, Justice Chandrachud is now being considered for the position of Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission or being sent to the International Court of Justice. He questioned whether these judges had compromised their integrity for such high positions.

 

He mentioned that Muslims in India have always worked towards Hindu-Muslim harmony. Members of the Khudai Khidmatgar organization in Delhi went to mosques and temples to promote communal harmony and unity. In Mathura, when it was time for prayer, Muslims members prayed in the courtyard of the Nand Baba Temple, Mathura after getting permission from the priest. This act was condemned, and the Muslims who sought to live in harmony were later jailed. Meanwhile, those who claim that temples lie under mosques and demand surveys are supported by the courts, and their petitions are accepted. These people seek to change the status of religious places.

 

 

Islamic Principles and Historical Context

 

He concluded by saying that Islam has never allowed disrespect to any place of worship. When the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) conquered Mecca, he removed the idols inside the Kaaba but did not alter its structure. He referenced historical instances where Muslim rulers guaranteed the protection of all places of worship, whether churches or other religious sites, in lands they conquered.

 

During the program, five demands were made:

 

1. The mistake made by the court in handing over the Babri Masjid land to the temple should be corrected, and the mosque should be returned to Muslims.

2. The Supreme Court had acknowledged that the Babri Masjid was not built by destroying a temple, so the land should not have been given to the temple. We demand that the Babri Masjid be returned to the Muslims.

3. All petitions claiming temples are under mosques across the country, which violate the Places of Worship Act, should be declared void.

4. Those making such petitions and causing disruptions to peace should be sentenced to three years in prison and a fine under Section 6 of the Places of Worship Act, 1991.

5. Hindu organizations demanding surveys under the pretext of temples beneath mosques should be declared a threat to national security and banned under the UAPA.

 

Nexlev Facial Steamer | Nano Ionic SteamTechnology | 2 In 1 Face Steamer & Vaporizer For Cold & Cough

 

Demands Made During the Program

Correct the Babri Masjid verdict and return the mosque to Muslims.
Declare all petitions violating the Places of Worship Act void.
Penalize those causing disruptions under Section 6 of the Worship Act, 1991.
Ban organizations demanding mosque surveys as threats to national security under UAPA.

 

Program Highlights

 

The program began with the recitation and translation of the Quran by Maulana Abu Ubaidah, Imam and Khateeb of Darul Falah Mosque, Govandi. Following this, the objectives of the program were presented by Abbas Shaikh, and the vote of thanks was delivered by Dr. Fareed Shaikh, the program concluded with a prayer.