The Supreme Court on Monday expressed concern over the growing number of intervention applications in the case challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar emphasized the need to limit such filings. "We will not take up the Places of Worship Act matter today. It is a three-judge Bench matter. Too many petitions filed. List sometime in March. There is a limit to interventions being filed," CJI Khanna remarked before scheduling the matter for hearing in March.

Several political entities and leaders, including the Congress Party, CPI(ML), Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind, and All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi, have filed intervention applications. They have defended the validity of the Act while opposing petitions challenging its constitutionality.

The Places of Worship Act, enacted during the peak of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, aims to maintain the status of all religious structures as they existed at the time of India’s independence in August 1947. It prevents courts from entertaining disputes regarding the religious character of such places. Additionally, cases already pending in courts concerning these disputes are required to be abated under the law.

An exception was made for the Ram Janmabhoomi site, which allowed the courts, including the High Court and the Supreme Court, to adjudicate on the Ayodhya dispute. In its 2019 verdict, while granting the disputed site in Ayodhya to the deity Ram Lalla, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that similar disputes concerning other sites could not be entertained due to the provisions of the Act.

This ruling led various Hindu organizations and individuals to challenge the validity of the law. Among them is Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Ashwini Upadhyay, whose petition prompted the Supreme Court to issue a notice in 2021. His plea argues that the Act perpetuates historical wrongs committed by invaders by preventing legal remedies for aggrieved Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs.

In December 2024, while hearing the challenge to the Act, the Supreme Court directed trial courts nationwide to refrain from passing substantive orders or conducting surveys of religious structures in cases contesting their religious identity until the top court delivers its ruling on the validity of the law.

This directive came as multiple Hindu groups filed civil suits claiming that several mosques were built over ancient temples. Currently, at least 18 suits concerning four religious structures remain pending before various courts. These include disputes over the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi, the Shahi Eidgah Masjid in Mathura, and the Ajmer Dargah in Rajasthan.

Muslim parties have opposed these suits, arguing that they are not maintainable under the provisions of the Places of Worship Act.

Case Title: Ashwini Upadhyay v. Union of India.