Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

GS Paper: GS1-10.Social empowerment, communalism, regionalism & secularism.

  • Can vehicles bear ‘Caste and Religious Stickers’?

    caste
    PC: The Quint

    Central Idea

    • Recent actions taken by the Noida and Ghaziabad Police to issue challans for displaying ‘caste and religious stickers’ on vehicles have stirred debate about the legality of such stickers.
    • This move, part of a special drive, raises questions about the intersection of vehicle regulations, social norms, and legal restrictions.

    Displaying Caste on Vehicles: Exploring Legal Framework

    • Caste and Religious Stickers: The legality of these stickers is assessed based on the Motor Vehicle Act and Motor Vehicle Rules.
    • State Orders: Various state governments, including Uttar Pradesh, have issued orders against affixing stickers signifying caste and religion on vehicles, even on the body of the vehicle.
    • Registration Number Plate: The Motor Vehicle Rules strictly forbid placing stickers on the registration number plate.

    Challenging Stickers and Law Enforcement

    • Challan Penalties: The penalties for placing such stickers on vehicles are set at Rs 1,000, while it rises to Rs 5,000 if the sticker is placed on the registration number plate.
    • Future Initiatives: The authorities have indicated their intention to continue conducting similar drives in the future.

    Number Plate Specifications and Violations

    • Number Plate Standards: The Motor Vehicle Rules specify the composition of the number plate, which should be a solid unit made of 1.0 mm aluminium with the letters “IND” in blue on the extreme left center.
    • Penalties for Violations: Section 192 of the MV Act outlines penalties for non-compliant number plates, including fines of up to Rs 5,000 for the first offense and potential imprisonment and fines for subsequent offenses.
    • 2019 Amendment: Post the 2019 MV Act amendment, the fines for violations rose to a maximum of Rs 2,000.

    Disobedience of Orders and Legal Consequences

    • Legal Basis: Police are issuing challans under Section 179 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 in the case of stickers on the body of vehicles.
    • Section 179 Details: Section 179 addresses “disobedience of orders, obstruction, and refusal of information.” Offenders can be fined up to Rs 500 as per the section.
    • Amendment Impact: Following the 2019 MV Act amendment, the fines for such offenses increased to a maximum of Rs 2,000.

    Conclusion

    • The legal scrutiny of ‘caste and religious stickers’ on vehicles underscores the tension between personal expressions, cultural practices, and legal regulations.
    • As legal frameworks evolve and society navigates its complex dynamics, finding the balance between individual rights and societal harmony remains an ongoing challenge.

  • Supreme Court concerns over Persistent Lynchings and Mob Violence

    Central Idea

    • The Supreme Court asked the Centre and six States to respond to a plea concerning the alarming incidents of lynchings and mob violence.
    • It highlighted the need for the government machinery to be held accountable for protecting the lives of victims, including members of the minority community.
    • Presently the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) does NOT maintain separate data on atrocities against religious minorities and on mob lynching.

    lynching

    Mob Lynching through Judiciary’s Lens

    • Apex Court’s 2018 Judgment: In the Tehseen Poonawala Case (2018), the Supreme Court warned against the rising wave of frenzied mobs fueled by fake news, self-professed morality, and false stories. The court foresaw these incidents as “creeping threats” and emphasized the necessity to curb them promptly.
    • Call for Special Law and Punishment: The 2018 judgment condemned mobocracy as an anathema and called for special laws and stringent punishments to address the issue effectively.

    What is Mob Lynching?

    • Mob lynching is a heinous act of premeditated extrajudicial killing carried out by a group to punish an alleged transgressor or intimidate a community.
    • The absence of a separate definition for lynching in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and inadequate provisions to deal with such crimes have raised concerns about the growing incidents of mob violence in the country.

    Need for an Anti-Lynching Law

    • Filling the Legal Void: An anti-lynching law would address the shortcomings in the current criminal jurisprudence, providing a specific legal framework to deal with such brutal acts. Presently, the IPC offers provisions for unlawful assembly, rioting, and murder, but there is no explicit law against mob lynching.
    • Curbing Lawlessness: An anti-lynching law would hold accountable those involved in lynching incidents, establishing a clear deterrent against such acts of violence.
    • Addressing the Rise in Lynching Incidents: Over the years, mob lynching cases have increased, necessitating a focused and comprehensive legal approach to combat this menace.

    Factors behind the Surge in Lynchings

    • Impunity: Lynch mobs often act with confidence, believing they will escape punishment. The lack of decisive action by the state has contributed to their audacity.
    • Communalism: In cow-linked lynchings, political considerations influence the response from the incumbent government, affecting the crackdown on such attacks.
    • Fake News: The rapid spread of misinformation through social media platforms fuels sudden waves of antagonism and contributes to mob violence.
    • Alienation and Unemployment: Modernity has eroded associational life and a sense of fraternity, leading to feelings of alienation. High unemployment rates also leave millions of youth disengaged, making them vulnerable to manipulation.

    Impact of Lynching

    • State: Lynching undermines fundamental rights enshrined in the constitution, leading to a crisis in law and order.
    • Economy: International agencies have issued warnings against mob lynching, negatively impacting foreign and domestic investments and sovereign ratings. It also hampers internal migration and places an additional burden on the state exchequer to tackle such incidents.
    • Society: Lynchings foster fear of radicalization, disrupt communal harmony, and promote intolerance, aggravating caste, class, and communal tensions.

    Way Forward

    • Proactive Measures: States must proactively monitor and flag rumours on social media and other platforms, adopting measures taken by some states as examples to deter such incidents.
    • Special Courts: Establishing special courts to try mob violence cases would ensure prompt and efficient justice delivery.

  • SC seeks Data on action taken against Lynchings

    lynching

    Central Idea

    • The Supreme Court has decided to assess the actions taken by the Union and States to address incidents of lynchings since its July 2018 judgment condemning these acts as mobocracy.
    • The court has directed State governments to provide year-wise data on complaints filed, FIRs registered, and court proceedings related to incidents of mob violence and lynchings.

    Mob Lynching: A Backgrounder

    • Concerns over Vigilantism: The 2018 Supreme Court bench, addressed the growing issues of vigilantism, mob lynching, communal violence, and hate crimes.
    • State Responsibility: The court emphasized that states have the duty to prevent individuals or core groups from taking the law into their own hands, stressing that every citizen has the right to report law infractions to the police rather than resorting to vigilantism.
    • Affront to the Rule of Law: The court declared that lynching undermines the rule of law and the constitutional values, leading to anarchy and violence in society.

    Supreme Court’s Observations

    • Prevention and Vigilance: The court stressed that authorities responsible for maintaining law and order must prevent vigilantism, including cow vigilantism, from occurring. Vigilante actions erode the legal institutions of the state and disrupt the constitutional order.
    • Rising Intolerance: The court expressed concern over rising intolerance and growing polarization, fueled by incidents of mob violence, emphasizing that such acts should not become the normal state of law and order in the country.
    • Creeping Threats: The court highlighted the dangers posed by lynching and mob violence, which could escalate into widespread incidents influenced by intolerance, misinformation, and the circulation of fake news.

    Directive for Preventive and Remedial Measures

    • Designation of Nodal Officers: State governments must appoint senior police officers as Nodal Officers in each district to prevent incidents of mob violence and lynching.
    • Identification of High-Incidence Areas: State governments should identify areas where mob violence and lynching have been reported.
    • Police Actions and FIR Registration: Police officers must disperse mobs using their authority under Section 129 of the CrPC, and FIRs must be promptly registered under Section 153A of the IPC.
    • Monitoring of Investigations: Nodal Officers have the responsibility to personally monitor the investigation of such offenses and ensure effective implementation.
    • Compensation Scheme: State governments should establish a victim compensation scheme for lynching and mob violence victims in line with Section 357A of the CrPC.
    • Designated Courts: Special designated courts or fast-track courts should handle cases related to lynching and mob violence in each district.

    Directive to State Governments

    • Information Gathering: A Bench comprising Justices Sanjeev Khanna and Bela M. Trivedi has instructed State governments to compile comprehensive data on incidents of mob violence and lynchings.
    • Year-wise Data: The data should include information on complaints filed, FIRs registered, and challans submitted to the courts, highlighting the progress made each year.
    • Coordination with State Departments: The court suggested that the Ministry of Home Affairs hold meetings with relevant department heads of the State governments to obtain updates on the measures taken in response to the court’s 2018 judgment in the Tehseen Poonawala case.
    • Compliance with Court’s Directions: The court had previously directed the formation of Special Task Forces by the States to gather intelligence on hate speeches, mob violence, and lynchings.

    Conclusion

    • The Supreme Court’s monitoring of preventive and remedial measures for mob lynching demonstrates the commitment to address this issue.
    • By directing the consolidation of data and urging compliance with the 2018 judgment, the court aims to hold the Union and State governments accountable for their actions.
    • These measures seek to curb vigilantism, protect the rule of law, and ensure justice for victims of mob violence and lynchings.

  • US seeks sanctions on Indian agencies over Religious Freedom Violations

    religious india

    The Commission for International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has urged to impose targeted sanctions on Indian government agencies and officials responsible for “severe violations” of religious freedom by freezing their assets.

    What is USCIRF Report?

    • The USCIRF report assesses the status of religious freedom around the world.
    • It provides a comprehensive analysis of the state of religious freedom in countries across the globe, highlighting issues of concern and making recommendations for action by the US government.
    • The report is an important tool for raising awareness of violations of religious freedom and advocating for greater protection of this fundamental human right.

    Allegations against India

    (1) Policies

    • It is alleged that the Indian government at the national, state, and local levels promoted and enforced religiously discriminatory policies, including:
    1. Laws targeting religious conversion
    2. Interfaith relationships
    3. Ban over wearing of hijabs and cow slaughter
    • This has negatively impact Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Dalits, and Adivasis.

    (2) Laws of Suppression

    • The report also alleges that the national government continued to suppress critical voices, particularly of religious minorities and those advocating on their behalf through-
    1. Surveillance / Harassment / Cow Vigilantism
    2. Accusation of Sedition
    3. Demolition of Property
    4. Detention under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA)
    5. Targeted banning of NGOs ex. Missionaries of Charity under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA)
    6. Constitution

    India’s response

    • India has slammed USCIRF for “misrepresenting” facts and described it as an “organisation of particular concern”.
    • The Indian government rejected the biased and inaccurate comments.
    • Foundation of Indian and Indian Diaspora Studies (FIIDS) slammed USCIRF for its biased report and failure to acknowledge the cultural and economic significance of cows to Indians.

    Why such reports often falsely target India?

    • Lack of objectivity: There have been instances in the past where these reports have been criticized for being one-sided and lacking objectivity.
    • US lobby against everyone: It is important to note that reports like USCIRF’s are based on the organization’s own assessments.
    • Inherent bias against India: Such allegations are prevalent ever since India attained its Freedom.
    • Self-proclaimed father of democracy: US has infamous for selectively promoting democracy and human rights, and for supporting authoritarian regimes that align with its strategic interests.
    • Anti-regime: Such reports often overlook the efforts made by the present regime in India towards promoting religious tolerance and communal harmony.

    Way forward

    • Urgent action: India needs to take prompt and necessary steps to address religious freedom issues and take everyone’s faith in the government and democratic process.
    • Nuanced understanding: International organizations and foreign governments must make a conscious effort to understand the complexities of India’s social, political, and economic landscape before making any recommendations or issuing reports.
    • Avoid sweeping generalizations: It is important to avoid sweeping generalizations and presenting a one-sided view of the situation, which can be detrimental to India’s reputation and lead to misunderstandings.
    • Self-reflection by the US: The US must address its own issues related to religious freedom and human rights violations, and not just sermon other countries.

    Conclusion

    • India’s historical diversity and pluralism: India has a long history of diversity, pluralism, and peaceful coexistence among different communities.
    • Constitutional guarantees: The Constitution guarantees fundamental rights to all citizens, regardless of their religion, caste, or creed.
    • Media as a strong pillar: The country has a vibrant democracy and a free and independent media that regularly scrutinizes the government and its policies. This eliminates the scope for anyone’s oppression.
    • Nation-building: All communities have contributed significantly to the country’s cultural and social fabric. Success of India is often unwelcomed by the US. People should not fall prey to foreign propaganda.

     

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your personal mentor for UPSC 2024 | Schedule your FREE session and get the Prelims prep Toolkit!

  • SC offers to find solution to ‘deceitful conversions’

    The Supreme Court said that- acts of charity or good work to help a community or the poor should not cloak an intention to religiously convert them as payback.

    What did the SC say?

    • Conversion on the basis of a voluntarily felt belief in the deity of a different faith is different from belief gained through allurement.
    • The court said it would examine such veiled intentions behind religious conversions through allurement by offering food, medicines, treatment, etc.

    What is Religious Conversions?

    • Religious conversion is the adoption of a set of beliefs identified with one particular religious denomination to the exclusion of others.
    • It is one of the most heated issues in the society and politics which can be defined as the adoption of any other religion or of a set of beliefs by the exclusion of other i.e. renouncing one religion and adopting another.
    • There are various reasons for which people do convert their religion like:
    1. Voluntary Conversions i.e. conversions by free choice or because of change of beliefs.
    2. Forceful Conversions i.e. conversions by coercion, undue influence or inducement.
    3. Marital Conversions i.e. conversions due to marriage.
    4. Conversion for convenience i.e. social mobility

    Constitutional ambiguity over conversions

    • The question whether ‘right to convert’ comes under the ambit of ‘right to propagate any religion’ holds fundamental importance to determine the constitutionality of anti-conversion laws.
    • Article 25 talks about the term “propagate” which means to promote or transmit or merely a freedom of expression.

    Why is this getting prominence in India?

    Selective persecution and religious marginalization is often debated in India due to religious conversions for:

    1. Ghar Wapsi
    2. Inter-faith Marriages (often termed as Love Jihad)

    What about Incentivised Conversions?

    • There are many cases of incentivized conversions for the poor sections of society in exchange for a dignified social life.

    For them, the solution lies in addressing the root issues:

    1. Ending discrimination
    2. Providing high-quality and free education to the poor and disenfranchised
    3. Improving access and quality of free health facilities and medicines
    4. Improving nourishment and
    5. Providing adequate employment opportunities to all

    How has Parliament handled anti-conversion bills?

    After independence, Parliament introduced a number of anti-conversion bills which were not enacted for want of majority approval.

    • In post-Independent India, the first Indian Conversion (Regulation and Registration) Bill, 1954, which sought to enforce “licensing of missionaries and the registration of conversion.”
    • This was followed by the introduction of the Backward Communities (Religious Protection) Bill, 1960, “which aimed at checking conversion of Hindus to ‘non-Indian religions’.
    • Non-India religions included Islam, Christianity, Judaism and Zoroastrianism,.
    • The Freedom of Religion Bill in 1979, which sought “official curbs on inter-religious conversion.”

    Conclusion

    • Religious conversion gives new identity to the communities converted which in turn leads to social mobility.
    • Hence, anti-conversion amount to discrimination and a violation of the right to equality.
    • However, inter-faith marriages should not be pre-conditioned with religious conversion.
    • This certainly raises concerns for the majority of society.
    • Also mass conversions for the sake of revivalism should also not be promoted in any ways.

     

     

    Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • India tops index on Social Hostilities Index (SHI)

    shi

    In 2020, India has been ranked first in the Social Hostilities Index (SHI) released by US think-tank Pew Research Center.

    What is Social Hostilities Index (SHI)?

    • SHI measures acts of religious hostility by private individuals, organisations or groups in society.
    • The SHI measures acts of religious hostility by private individuals, organizations or groups.
    • The index comprises 13 metrics, including religion-related armed conflict or terrorism and mob or sectarian violence.
    • Questions used to compute the SHI included whether the country saw violence motivated by religious hatred or bias, whether individuals faced harassment or intimidation motivated by religious hatred or bias and whether there was mob violence against those of particular religious groups.

    How bad has India fared?

    • At 9.4 out of a maximum possible score of 10, India’s SHI in 2020 was worse than neighbouring Pakistan and Afghanistan, and a further increase in its own index value for 2019, the Pew data showed.
    • India has faced severe backlash due to its crackdown on a ‘religious’ congregation held in New Delhi defying the COVID pandemic.

    Other components: Government Restrictions Index (GRI)

    • India much better on a second index: the Government Restrictions Index (GRI).
    • This index looks at laws, policies and state actions restricting religious beliefs and practices.
    • China ranked the worst, with a score of 9.3.
    • India’s 34th rank was enough to categorize it among countries with “high” levels of such government restrictions.
    • The GRI comprises 20 measures, including efforts by governments to ban particular faiths, prohibit conversion, limit preaching or give preferential treatment to one or more religious groups

    Official data for substantiation

    • By India’s own official crime statistics, the picture is more mixed.
    • According to police data, religious riots for which cases were filed rose substantially in 2020, and declined again in 2021.
    • But there have been significant variations over time, and the numbers are too low as a share of overall rioting incidents to indicate a definitive trend.
    • Moreover, the home ministry no longer provides data on “communal incidents”, and the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) now only publishes data on religious “riots”.

     

    Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • Take immediate action against hate speech: SC

    hate-speech

    The Supreme Court has expressed concern over growing incidents of hate speeches in the country and directed the governments and police authorities to take suo motu action in such cases without waiting for lodging of formal complaints.

    Why in news?

    • There has been rising incidents of hate speeches targeting a particular community in India.

    What is ‘Hate Speech’?

    • There is no specific legal definition of ‘hate speech’.
    • The Law Commission of India, in its 267th Report, says: “Hate speech generally is an incitement to hatred primarily against a group of persons defined in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief and the like …
    • Thus, hate speech is any word written or spoken, signs, visible representations within the hearing or sight of a person with the intention to cause fear or alarm, or incitement to violence.”
    • In general, hate speech is considered a limitation on free speech that seeks to prevent or bar speech that exposes a person or a group or section of society to hate, violence, ridicule or indignity.

    How is it treated in Indian law?

    • Provisions in law criminalize speeches, writings, actions, signs and representations that foment violence and spread disharmony between communities and groups and these are understood to refer to ‘hate speech’.
    • Sections 153A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code are generally taken to be the main penal provisions that deal with inflammatory speeches and expressions that seek to punish ‘hate speech’.

    [I] Section 153A:

    • Promotion of enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony’, is an offence punishable with three years’ imprisonment.

    [II] Section 505:

    • 505(1): Statements conducing to public mischief– The statement, publication, report or rumour that is penalized under Section 505(1) should be one that promotes mutiny by the armed forces, or causes such fear or alarm that people are induced to commit an offence against the state or public tranquillity. This attracts a jail term of up to three years.
    • 505(2): It is an offence to make statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes.
    • 505(3): Same offence will attract up to a five-year jail term if it takes place in a place of worship, or in any assembly engaged in religious worship or religious ceremonies.

    Why curb hate speeches?

    • Creates social divide: Individuals believe in stereotypes that are ingrained in their minds and these stereotypes lead them to believe that a class or group of persons are inferior to them and as such cannot have the same rights as them.
    • Threat to peaceful co-existence: The stubbornness to stick to a particular ideology without caring for the right to co-exist peacefully adds further fuel to the fire of hate speech.

    Issues in regulating hate speech

    • Powers to State: Almost every regulation of speech, no matter how well-intentioned, increases the power of the state.
    • Hate speeches are Political: The issue is fundamentally political and we should not pretend that fine legal distinctions will solve the issue.
    • Legal complications: An over-reliance on legal instruments to solve fundamentally social and political problems often backfires.

    Way forward

    • Subjects like hate speeches become a complex issue to deal with, in a country like India which is very diverse, as it was very difficult to differentiate between free and hate speech.
    • There are many factors that should be considered while restraining speeches like strong opinions, offensive comments towards certain communities, the effect on values like dignity, liberty and equality.
    • We all have to work together and communicate efficiently for our country to be a healthy place to live in.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Official Language Panel and a fresh ‘Hindi Imposition’ Row

    The 11th volume of the Report of the Official Language Committee headed by Home Minister submitted to President has triggered angry reactions from the CMs of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, who have described the Report as an attempt to impose Hindi on non-Hindi-speaking states.

    About the Official Language Panel (for Hindi)

    • The Committee of Parliament on Official Language was set up in 1976 under Section 4 of The Official Languages Act, 1963.
    • Section 4 of the Act says there shall be constituted a Committee on Official language, on a resolution to that effect being moved in either House of Parliament.
    • It should have the previous sanction of the President and passed by both Houses.

    Terms of reference of the committee

    • The Committee is chaired by the Union Home Minister, and has, in accordance with the provisions of the 1963 Act, 30 members — 20 MPs from Lok Sabha and 10 MPs from Rajya Sabha.
    • The job of the Committee is to review the progress made in the use of Hindi for official purposes, and to make recommendations to increase the use of Hindi in official communications.

    History of its establishment

    • With the active promotion of Hindi being mandated by Article 351 of the Constitution, the Official Language Committee was set up to review and promote the use of Hindi in official communications.
    • The first Report of the Committee was submitted in 1987.

    Issues with the committee

    • The name of the Committee is a little misleading.
    • This is because unlike the other Parliamentary panels, the Committee on Official Language is constituted by the Home Ministry.
    • It does not submit its report to Parliament like other Committees of Parliament.
    • The contents of the report submitted are not in the public domain.
    • The panel has the largest representation from the ruling majority party. This has made states more furious.

    What has the Shah panel recommended in its latest (2021) report?

    • Medium of instruction: The panel has made around 100 recommendations, including that Hindi should be the medium of instruction in IITs, IIMs, and central universities in the Hindi-speaking states.
    • Administrative communication: The language used for communication in the administration should be Hindi, and efforts should be made to teach the curriculum in Hindi, but the latter is not mandatory.
    • Hindi translation of HC verdicts: High Courts in other states, where proceedings are recorded in English or a regional language can make available translations in Hindi, because verdicts of High Court of other states are often cited in judgments.
    • Mandate for govt. officials: The panel wants state governments to warn officials that their reluctance to use Hindi would reflect in their Annual Performance Assessment Report (APAR).

    Why are these recommendations under criticism?

    The crux of the recommendations is being ‘perceived’ that-

    • There is a deliberate attempt to reduce the usage of the English language in official communication and to increase the usage of Hindi.
    • Knowledge of Hindi would be compulsory in a number of government jobs.

    Is this the first time that such recommendations have been made?

    • The makers of the Constitution had decided that both Hindi and English should be used as official languages for the first 15 years of the Republic.
    • But in the wake of intense anti-Hindi agitations in the south, the Centre announced that English would continue to be used even after 1965.
    • On January 18, 1968, Parliament passed the Official Language Resolution to build a comprehensive program to increase the use of Hindi for official purposes by the Union of India.

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • SC takes up pleas against Places of Worship Act

    The Supreme Court has set the ball rolling on a series of petitions challenging the validity of the Places of Worship Act of 1991, a parliamentary law that protects the identity and character of religious places as on August 15, 1947.

    What are the petitions about?

    • A slew of petitions has been filed against the Act.
    • The Act has fixed a retrospective cut-off date illegally barring Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs from approaching courts to re-claim their places of worship which were invaded and encroached.
    • The main objective of these petitions is to set right a historical wrong committed by barbaric invaders.

    Places of Worship Act, 1991

    • It was passed in 1991 by the P V Narasimha Rao-led government.
    • The law seeks to maintain the “religious character” of places of worship as it was in 1947 — except in the case of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, which was already in court.
    • The law was brought in at the peak of the Ram Mandir movement, exactly a year before the demolition of the Babri Masjid.
    • Introducing the law, then Home Minister S B Chavan said in Parliament that it was adopted to curb communal tension.

    What are its provisions?

    What are its provisions?

    • Anti-conversion: Section 3 of the Act bars the conversion, in full or part, of a place of worship of any religious denomination into a place of worship of a different religious denomination — or even a different segment of the same religious denomination.
    • Holiness of a place: Section 4(1) declares that the religious character of a place of worship “shall continue to be the same as it existed” on August 15, 1947.
    • Litigation: Section 4(2) says any suit or legal proceeding with respect to the conversion of the religious character of any place existing on August 15, 1947, pending before any court, shall abate — and no fresh suit or legal proceedings shall be instituted.
    • Exception for Ayodhya: Section 5 stipulates that the Act shall not apply to the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case, and to any suit, appeal or proceeding relating to it.

    Why is the law under challenge?

    • The cut-off date of August 15, 1947, is “arbitrary, irrational and retrospective” and prohibits Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs from approaching courts to “reclaim” their places of worship.
    • Such places, he argued, were “invaded” and “encroached” upon by “fundamentalist barbaric invaders”.
    • The right-wing politicians have opposed the law even when it was introduced, arguing that the Centre has no power to legislate on “pilgrimages” or “burial grounds” which is under the state list.
    • Another criticism against the law is that the cut-off is the date of Independence, which means that the status quo determined by a colonial power is considered final.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Gyanvapi -Kashi Vishwanath Temple Complex Dispute

    gyanvapi

    The Varanasi District and Sessions Court has rejected the plea of the organization which manages the Gyanvapi mosque complex, challenging the maintainability of the civil suits filed by some women seeking the right to worship Goddesses on the outer wall of the complex.

    About Gyanvapi Mosque

    • The Gyanvapi Mosque was built in 1669 during the reign of the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb, who ordered the demolition of the existing Vishweshwar temple at the site, and its replacement by a mosque.
    • The plinth of the temple was left untouched, and served as the courtyard of the mosque.
    • One of the walls too was spared, and it became the qibla wall, the most important wall in a mosque that faces Mecca.
    • Material from the destroyed temple was used to build the mosque, evidence of which can be seen today.
    • The name of the mosque is said to have derived from an adjoining well, the Gyanvapi, or Well of Knowledge.
    • An old sculpture of the Nandi bull inside the compound of the present Kashi Vishwanath Temple faces the wall of the mosque instead of the sanctum sanctorum of the temple.
    • It is believed that Nandi is in fact, facing the sanctum sanctorum of the original Vishweshwar temple.

    The temple to Lord Shiva

    • For more than 100 years after the mosque was built, there was no temple at the site.
    • The present Kashi Vishwanath Temple was built in the 18th century by Rani Ahilyabai Holkar of Indore, immediately to the south of the mosque.
    • Over the decades it emerged as one of the most prominent and revered centres of the Hindu religion.
    • Many Hindus have long believed that the original deity of the erstwhile Vishweshwar temple was hidden by the priests inside the Gyanvapi well during Aurangzeb’s raid.
    • This has fired the desire to conduct puja and rituals at the sacred place where the mosque now stands.

    Longstanding claims

    • From time to time, petitioners have laid claim to the mosque, saying it remains the original sacred place of Hindu worship.
    • The Ayodhya movement also aimed to “liberate” the Kashi-Vishwanath Temple-Gyanvapi mosque site and the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi in Mathura as well.

    What laws restrict such acts?

    • The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 — which mandates that the nature of all places of worship, except the one in Ayodhya that was then under litigation, shall be maintained as it was on August 15, 1947.
    • It maintains that no encroachment of any such place prior to the date can be challenged in courts — applies to the disputed complex in Varanasi.

    What was the case before the Court?

    • The temple worshipers side had argued that the mosque was built on the site of an older temple, while the another side pleaded that the mosque was built on Wakf premises.
    • The plea also said that The Places of Worship Act of 1991 barred the changing of the character of the mosque.
    • The case was initially heard by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Varanasi, but it was transferred by the Supreme Court to the District Judge on grounds of the “complexity of the issues involved in the civil suit”.
    • The Supreme Court said it would wait for the district court’s decision on the mosque committee’s application before intervening in the matter.

    Issue in Limelight

    • In April 2021, Fast Track Court Civil Judge ordered the Archaeological Survey of India to get a comprehensive archaeological physical survey” done of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple-Gyanvapi Mosque complex.
    • It was tasked to find out as to whether the religious structure standing at present at the disputed site is a superimposition, alteration or addition or there is a structural overlapping of any kind, with or over, any religious structure.
    • The mosque is not an ASI-protected site, and the ASI has no role in its maintenance or upkeep.

    What are the people seeking now?

    • Worshippers find the cut-off date of August 15, 1947, is “arbitrary, irrational and retrospective” and prohibits Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs from approaching courts to “reclaim” their places of worship.
    • Such places, they argue, were “invaded” and “encroached” upon by “fundamentalist barbaric invaders”.
    • Certain groups have opposed the law even when it was introduced, arguing that the Centre has no power to legislate on “pilgrimages” or “burial grounds” which are under the state list.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)