View: Why Supreme Court must stop conversion of places of worship

A courtroom in Uttar Pradesh has requested the Archaeological Survey of India to research the declare of a Hindu petitioner that the Gyanvapi mosque at Varanasi was created by destroying a Hindu temple. Another courtroom has admitted a petition at hand over the Shahi mosque at Mathura to these claiming it was the birthplace of Krishna. Yet one other courtroom has admitted a swimsuit in search of the handover of temples allegedly destroyed to construct the Qutub Minar complicated in Delhi.

This threatens infinite new communal battles that had been supposed to finish with the Places of Worship Act 1991 that froze the non secular standing of all shrines as of August 15, 1947, ending pending fits and banned recent ones.

In its Babri Masjid verdict, the Supreme Court praised this Act and stated “non-retrogression is a foundational feature of the fundamental constitutional principles, of which secularism is a core component.” The Act and Supreme Court’s language had been unambiguous. Yet decrease courts are admitting petitions in clear contravention of the Act and the Supreme Court’s interpretation.

The Act makes it felony to try non secular takeovers. Logically, the Hindu petitioners within the new circumstances must be prosecuted. If as an alternative decrease courtroom judges admit such fits, are they not ignoring the legislation and committing contempt of the Supreme Court?

Some liberals despair that the Supreme Court not protects secularism and is pro-Hindutva. That is a gross exaggeration. Liberals ought to petition the Supreme Court to reprimand the erring judges in UP and uphold the sanctity of the 1991 Act.

Let none deny that conquerors via historical past looted and destroyed places of worship. Aurangzeb destroyed a temple to construct the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi. Historians like Richard Eaton report that Hindu kings conquering different Hindu kings additionally looted their temples, not only for cash however to emphasize that the outdated order had been changed by the brand new. For occasion, in 642 AD. the Pallava king Narasimhavarman conquered the Chalukyas, looting and destroying their royal temple.

Some conquerors espoused a brand new faith. They generally constructed a shrine for his or her new faith after destroying the prevailing shrine, re-using stones and pillars from the ruins. Sometimes a spot of worship was transformed wholesale into one for the brand new faith. The best instance is the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, an impressive Byzantine church transformed to a mosque by Ottoman conquerors.

But conversions in the wrong way had been additionally widespread. The Grand Mosque in Cordoba, Spain, was inbuilt 764 AD. It was not destroyed after Christian re-conquest, however within the thirteenth century its central portion was transformed right into a cathedral. A Wikipedia search reveals 16 Spanish mosques transformed to church buildings. Portugal has three such conversions, notably of the Aljama mosque in Mertola. Other notable conversions embrace the Ibrahim Pasha mosque in Greece, the Black Mosque in Bulgaria and Pasha Asim mosque in Hungary. Three mosques in Israel have turn into synagogues.

History brims with conquests altering the character of places of worship. But the reply can’t be to re-fight each historic battle — that can stoke everlasting non secular battle. The phrase and spirit of the Indian Constitution swear by secularism, which will likely be destroyed by re-fighting each historical quarrel.

Not many know that a number of mosques in India had been transformed to temples, primarily within the hate-filled rage of India’s partition. The Jama Masjid in Sonipat, Haryana, was transformed to a Durga Mandir. It has classical Muslim domes and minarets, so no Archaeological Survey inquiry is required to indicate that its non secular character was modified.

Farrukhnagar, Haryana, had a Jama Masjid inbuilt 1732, which was transformed to a Hindu temple and gurudwara after the mass arrival of refugees from Pakistan after partition. The constructing nonetheless has three typical Muslim domes and two minarets, one half destroyed.

The Jama Masjid constructed by the Khilji dynasty in Aurangabad is now a Bharat Mata temple. The Dana Shir mosque in Hisar turned a Bhagwan Danasher temple after India’s partition riots.

This raises an attention-grabbing query. If the courts entertain fits for the Hindu reclamation of mosques in Varanasi and different places, must they not concurrently contemplate the Muslim reclamation of all of the mosques transformed to temples? After all, the Constitution clearly bans discrimination on the bottom of faith. Yet changing temples to mosques will spark communal riots.

Ideally, the Supreme Court ought to halt all of the fits within the decrease courts. Meanwhile, it has been requested to listen to a swimsuit difficult the constitutional validity of the 1991 Act. One of many causes to uphold the Act is that non secular takeovers have traditionally occurred in each instructions, and attempting to appropriate all historic wrongs is a recipe for always stoking hate and disastrous violence.

Views are private