Places of Worship Act:Why was the law brought in & has it achieved its purpose?|Ep8 Laws of the Land 

I will vote for the party who promises to scrap this law

Why are we afraid of History and brush it under the carpet?

Sai Deepak should have been in the panel

When impeccable scientific logics n arguments are put forward, these lawyers immediately resort to philosophical and intellectual dishonesty behind the stereotype question like "where to stop"!

Classic episode, where activism is seemingly trumping up the discussion. First off, there's no balance to the panel, with no space given to advocates who have been voicing against the law. Second, convenient ignoring of the politics before and after the law was introduced. Third, no mention of what's the demographic/religious distribution of disputed places. Quiet disappointing, aside from being flawed and incomplete.

The Print brought, advocate for against argument in Ayodhya temple case. To explain us the 1991 Act and the new petitions in the courts.

Apoorva mandhani very skillfully concealed ad. Chaubey's work history in Supreme Court .Ad Chaubey pleaded for Muslim party in Ram Temple case in Supreme Court.

Congress: forms alliance with Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) the successor of Muslim League which partitioned India.

Are these Anchors aware of the grey areas in the 1991 Law to say that it is in Black and White. Juvenile standard of Journalism under the pretences of knowledge.

Ad. चौबे was fighting for Muslim party on the Ram mandir issue . Why only one side perspective is allowed on the print ? Why not J sai Deepak called?

भारत की सभी अदालतों में लोगों को उनकी कौम के हिसाब से क़सम खिलाई जानी चाहिए। मुसलमान को कुरान और अल्लाह की,ईसाई को बाईबल और जिसस की, सनातनियों को गीता की। यह बहुत ही ज़रूरी है।

The Places of WORSHIP ACT is the most blatant example of discrimination/Hinduphobia faced by Hindus in India, It also shows the bigotted Abhramic still prevalent in the Ruling/Elite class.

The Government of the day in 1991in its wisdom enacted Places of Worship Act. People are very eager to adopt the modern scientific inventions of the day as soon as they hit the market but when it has to do with that or any other antiquated Law it is being treated as if it is a word of God. If that is not Duplicity then what is? Why the 1991 law can not be amended or removed because it has lived its life.

Can you pls make this kind video on Waqf Act?

May you kindly discuss about the Bihar Estate act popularly known as Khasmahal act,also applied on part of Jharkhand, which has real complexion on field enforcement. So generally saying the act on paper without enforcement.

This was really informative. Thanks :)

Which party has this advocate pleaded for in the hon'ble SC?

I dont know whether the lawyer concealed the fact deliberately that the court said that Sringargowri was worshipped there till 1993 and Mulayam Singh government banned it after 6 Dec and also the Gyanwapi has been defined as a place in Kashi vishwanath Act 1983 ,so the government know the reality of that place .So if there was worship till 1993 ,how can the act prevent the worship which prevents change of character from 1947 . As on 15 th august 1947 it was also a place of worship for hindus . Also the SC has told in the RJB case that the character of place don't get changed even the place is desecrated in Hinduism ,so once a place of worship of hindus won't change its character even if some invaders desecrate it and latter some foster children of Aurangzeb legalised this desecration. However the 'secular ' media which went 100 miles to falsely propagate that SC has made the POW act basic structure ,forgot to report other observations in the case . It came in light of Varanasi District court judgement . Why these people don't discuss what has happened in history . We should not forget history .Even Maharaja Ranjit Singh had brought the gate of Somnath after 800 years from Afghanistan in 1800s and it is now in The Golden Temple since Somnath was not revived till then and yes he had not read history in JNU from so-called historians .

If this standard line - to ab kya badla loge ‘ goes around, all court cases can be dismissed following this argument

Excellent explanation of the PWA 1991.