05 Mar

Question of the Day – Places of Worship Act, 1991

QOTD March 4,2026

With reference to the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, consider the following statements:

1. The Act prohibits conversion of any place of worship from one religious denomination to another.
2. The Act provides that the religious character of a place of worship shall be maintained as it existed on 15th August 1947.
3. The provisions of the Act apply to the Ram Janmabhoomi–Babri Masjid dispute.
4. The Act bars courts from entertaining any suit or proceeding regarding conversion of the religious character of a place of worship.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1, 2 and 4 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 4 only
(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer: (a) 1, 2 and 4 only

 Explanation:

• Statement 1-Correct
  The Act clearly prohibits the conversion 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 religion.
• Statement 2-Correct
  Section 4 of the Act freezes the religious character of a place of worship as it existed on 15 August 1947, the date of independence.
• Statement 3-Incorrect
  The Act specifically excludes the Ram Janmabhoomi–Babri Masjid dispute from its purview.
• Statement 4-Correct
  The Act bars courts from entertaining any fresh suits or legal proceedings regarding the change of religious character after 15 August 1947 (except pending cases at the time of enactment).

Why in news–

The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 is in news because its constitutional validity is being challenged in the Supreme Court. The Act freezes the religious character of places of worship as of 15 August 1947. Ongoing disputes related to Gyanvapi (Varanasi) and Mathura have raised questions about whether such suits are barred under the Act. The issue involves secularism, judicial review, and communal harmony, making it constitutionally significant.

News-Balancing faith and law: The Places of Worship Act, 1991, and why it continues to be invoked | Research News – The Indian Express

There are more questions from this topic that you should practice to make your concepts stronger.

Practice Questions (PQ)

PQ1. Which of the following disputes is specifically exempted from the provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991?

(a) Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi dispute
(b) Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi dispute
(c) Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute
(d) Any dispute pending before a High Court in 1991

Answer: (c)

 Explanation:

Section 5 of the Act clearly states that the Act does not apply to the Ram Janmabhoomi–Babri Masjid dispute. This exemption allowed adjudication of the matter, which was later decided by the Supreme Court in 2019.

Other disputes like Kashi and Mathura are not exempted and hence legally contentious under this Act.

---

PQ2. The primary objective of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 is to:

(a) Promote uniform civil code
(b) Protect secularism by freezing religious status as of Independence
(c) Empower the judiciary to review all historical religious disputes
(d) Facilitate conversion of disputed religious sites into national monuments

 Answer: (b)

Explanation:

The Act was enacted to:

• Maintain communal harmony
• Protect India’s secular fabric
• Prevent reopening of historical disputes
• Provide legal certainty by freezing religious character as of 15 August 1947

In the Ayodhya judgment (2019), the Supreme Court described the Act as a legislative instrument that protects secularism, which is part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution.

---

PQ3. Consider the following statements:

1. The Act applies retrospectively to all disputes arising before 1947.
2. The Act extinguishes pending suits relating to conversion of religious character, except those already decided.
3. Archaeological monuments covered under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act are outside the scope of this Act.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only

 Explanation:

• Statement 1-Incorrect
  The Act does not reopen pre-1947 disputes; instead, it freezes status as of 15 August 1947.
• Statement 2-Correct
  Section 4(2) abates (extinguishes) pending suits related to change of religious character, except disputes already settled or specifically exempted.
• Statement 3-Correct
  Monuments protected under the Ancient Monuments Act are outside the purview of this legislation.

 Previous Year Question (UPSC Prelims)

Consider the following statements:

1. The motion to impeach a judge of the Supreme Court of India can be moved in either House of Parliament.
2. The Constitution of India defines and gives details of what constitutes incapacity and proved misbehavior.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2

 Answer: (a) 1 only

Explanation:

Statement 1-Correct

Under Article 124(4) of the Constitution of India, a Judge of the Supreme Court can be removed by the President after an address by Parliament. The motion for removal (impeachment) can be initiated in either House of Parliament-Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha.

For the motion to pass, it must be supported by:

• A majority of the total membership of the House, and
• A two-thirds majority of members present and voting.

The detailed procedure for investigation and removal is laid down in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

Statement 2-Incorrect

While the Constitution provides that a judge can be removed on the grounds of “proved misbehaviour or incapacity,” it does not define what constitutes misbehaviour or incapacity.

The Constitution only lays down the broad grounds and framework. The procedural aspects are provided through parliamentary law, but the exact definitions are not explicitly detailed in the Constitution.