A retired officer, Anil Kabotra said, in his plea, said a retrospective closing date was fixed to legalise the illegal acts of barbaric invaders
A fresh plea has been filed within the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991, contending that the law arbitrarily created an irrational retrospective deadline of Assumption of Mary, 1947, for maintaining the character of the religious places.
A retired officer, Anil Kabotra said, in his plea, said a retrospective closing date was fixed to legalise the illegal acts of barbaric invaders. He claimed the Act violated the principles of secularism and barred review, a basic feature of the Constitution.
The plea, filed through advocate Ashwini Kumar Dubey, challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991, which it said offends Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29.
The petition said Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs, have the correct to profess, practice and propagate religion as provided in their religious scriptures and Article 13 prohibits, making a law which takes away their rights. It further claimed the proper to revive back religious property is unfettered and continuing wrong and injury could also be cured by judicial remedy.
Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, BJP leader Subramanium Swamy, advocate Rudra Vikram Singh, and Swami Jeetendranand Saraswati, a non secular leader, are among the petitioners who have already filed petitions within the top court challenging validity of the 1991 Act.
Recently, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, a Muslim organisation, has also moved the apex court seeking to implead within the PIL filed by Upadhyay, on which notice was issued last year.
The plea added that historical wrongs can not be remedied by the people taking the law into their own hands.