Worship Act 1991: Lord Rama was kept out of the act, then why not Shri Krishna, while both incarnations of Vishnu, the question raised in the petition

During the hearing on the Places of Worship Act 1991, the Center again adopted a hesitant attitude. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta in the Supreme Court said that he needs to consult with the top officials of the government. Therefore, the matter should be listed in the first week of December.

A bench of CJI Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala fixed the matter for hearing in the first week of January 2023. The bench said that before December 12, counter affidavit should be filed in any case. The court also ordered that the matter be referred to a three-judge bench. The special thing is that the Supreme Court had sought a response from the Center on this petition in March 2021. But the government continued to be cautious.

Keep in mind that the Places of Worship Act 1991 came to the fore when the atmosphere was hot in the whole country regarding Ram Janmabhoomi. Through this, any change in religious places was to be prevented. In this, the court cannot hear matters related to religious places. Ram Janmabhoomi was excluded from the Act. The Supreme Court had invoked the Act in 2019 while transferring the land for Ram Lalla’s temple. However, then Koit had also said that it would not be applicable in the case of other religious places.

BJP spokesperson Ashwani Upadhyay said in his petition that the Act supports the atrocities of foreign invaders. Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists cannot approach the High Court under Article 226 for the restoration of their religious places. The Act says that the status of religious places should be maintained as on 15 August 1947.

Regarding the Act, it was said in the petition that Ram Janmabhoomi has been acquitted from it. But Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi has been kept within its purview. While both Rama and Krishna are incarnations of Lord Vishnu. SG Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court during the hearing held on Wednesday that the 1991 Ayodhya verdict has no direct relation to the legality of the Act.