UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Security tightened at disputed Mathura temple amid ‘Kar Seva’ concerns, HC told

Question 1

With reference to the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, consider the following pairings of provisions with their content:
1. Section 3 — bar on the conversion of a place of worship of any religious denomination into a place of worship of a different denomination or of a different section of the same denomination.
2. Section 4 — declaration that the religious character of a place of worship shall continue to be the same as it existed on 15 August 1947, together with a bar on the jurisdiction of courts.
3. Section 5 — punishment with imprisonment which may extend to three years and with fine for contravening the bar on conversion.
4. Section 7 — exclusion of the Ram Janma Bhumi-Babri Masjid place of worship from the operation of the Act.
Which of the above is/are correctly identified?

Accepted Answer

1 and 2 only

Answer

2 and 3 only

Answer

1, 3 and 4

Answer

1, 2 and 4

Question 2

Under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, a person who abets, or is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit, the offence of converting a place of worship is liable to which one of the following?

Accepted Answer

The punishment provided for the offence itself, notwithstanding anything contained in Section 116 of the Indian Penal Code

Answer

Imprisonment which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both, abetment being treated as a distinct and lesser offence under the Act

Answer

The punishment provided for the offence, but only in cases where the abetted conversion of the place of worship has actually been carried out

Answer

Imprisonment which may extend to three years but no fine, the fine being leviable only upon the principal offender under the Act

Question 3

The 1968 compromise agreement that permitted the temple and the mosque at Mathura to function side by side on the same premises was entered into between which two entities?

Accepted Answer

The Shri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan and the Trust Shahi Masjid Eidgah

Answer

The Shri Krishna Janmbhoomi Mukti Nirmaan Trust and the Shahi Masjid Eidgah Management Committee

Answer

The Shri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan and the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board

Answer

The Katra Keshav Dev Temple Trust and the Shahi Masjid Eidgah Management Committee

Question 4

Under the 1968 compromise arrangement at the Katra Keshav Dev complex in Mathura, the land left with the mosque side measured approximately how much?

Accepted Answer

2.5 acres

Answer

3.5 acres

Answer

10.9 acres

Answer

12.0 acres

Question 5

With reference to the proceedings before the Allahabad High Court in 2026 concerning the Katra Keshav Dev–Shahi Idgah complex, consider the following:
1. The suit in question is Original Suit No. 4 of 2023, instituted by the Shri Krishna Janmbhoomi Mukti Nirmaan Trust against the Shahi Masjid Eidgah Management Committee.
2. The plaintiff had sought directions to the State Government and the local administration to bar any group from entering the site for meetings, 'Kar Seva' or events disturbing public peace.
3. The sealed-cover report on the security arrangements at the disputed complex was called for from the Archaeological Survey of India.
4. The matter stands listed for its next hearing on 18 September 2026.
Which of the above is/are correctly identified?

Accepted Answer

1, 2 and 4 only

Answer

1 and 3 only

Answer

2, 3 and 4 only

Answer

1 and 4 only

Question 6

As of 2026, how many civil suits seeking the removal of the Shahi Idgah as an alleged encroachment upon the Katra Keshav Dev complex are pending before the Allahabad High Court?

Accepted Answer

18

Answer

12

Answer

22

Answer

9

Question 7

Consider the following statements comparing the Ayodhya dispute with the Mathura and Varanasi disputes:
1. The Ram Janma Bhumi-Babri Masjid place of worship was expressly kept outside the operation of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, whereas the Mathura and Varanasi sites enjoy no such statutory exclusion.
2. In Ayodhya the title dispute has been finally decided, the entire disputed area having been given to the deity with a separate plot of land directed to be allotted for a mosque, while the Mathura title suits are yet to be decided on their merits.
3. The Gyanvapi and Shahi Idgah disputes are heard by the Supreme Court as a court of first instance, civil courts having been divested of jurisdiction over them.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Accepted Answer

1 and 2 only

Answer

1 only

Answer

2 and 3 only

Answer

1, 2 and 3

Question 8

The title dispute decided by the Supreme Court in the Ram Janmabhoomi matter in November 2019 concerned a disputed site measuring approximately how many acres?

Accepted Answer

2.77 acres

Answer

5.00 acres

Answer

7.50 acres

Answer

13.37 acres

Question 9

In the challenge to the maintainability of the Mathura suits that the Allahabad High Court rejected in August 2024, the objection rested on a bar allegedly created by certain statutes. Consider the following:
1. The Limitation Act, 1963
2. The Specific Relief Act, 1963
3. The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958
4. The Waqf Act, 1995
Which of the above is/are correctly identified as statutes which the Court held did not bar the suits?

Accepted Answer

1, 2 and 4 only

Answer

1 and 3 only

Answer

2 and 4 only

Answer

1, 3 and 4 only

Question 10

In a civil suit, the principal procedural device by which a defendant seeks rejection of the plaint at the threshold, before the suit is tried on its merits, is:

Accepted Answer

Order VII Rule 11 of the Code, under which a plaint may be rejected on grounds apparent from the plaint itself

Answer

Section 9 of the Code, which excludes all suits concerning religious endowments from the cognisance of civil courts

Answer

Section 151 of the Code, which vests every court with an inherent power to dismiss any suit at any stage of the proceedings

Answer

Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code, under which every disputed property is placed in the custody of a receiver

Question 11

The Allahabad High Court proceedings in Original Suit No. 4 of 2023, in which the Mathura administration reported on security arrangements at the disputed complex, are being heard by a Bench comprising how many judges?

Accepted Answer

One

Answer

Two

Answer

Three

Answer

Five

UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Security tightened at disputed Mathura temple amid ‘Kar Seva’ concerns, HC told

Q2. Under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, a person who abets, or is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit, the offence of converting a place of worship is liable to which one of the following?

Q3. The 1968 compromise agreement that permitted the temple and the mosque at Mathura to function side by side on the same premises was entered into between which two entities?

Q4. Under the 1968 compromise arrangement at the Katra Keshav Dev complex in Mathura, the land left with the mosque side measured approximately how much?

Q6. As of 2026, how many civil suits seeking the removal of the Shahi Idgah as an alleged encroachment upon the Katra Keshav Dev complex are pending before the Allahabad High Court?

Q8. The title dispute decided by the Supreme Court in the Ram Janmabhoomi matter in November 2019 concerned a disputed site measuring approximately how many acres?

Q10. In a civil suit, the principal procedural device by which a defendant seeks rejection of the plaint at the threshold, before the suit is tried on its merits, is:

Q11. The Allahabad High Court proceedings in Original Suit No. 4 of 2023, in which the Mathura administration reported on security arrangements at the disputed complex, are being heard by a Bench comprising how many judges?