Skip to main content

Supreme Court Questions Key Provisions of Waqf Amendment Act 2025, Hints at Interim Stay


The Supreme Court of India raises concerns over the Waqf Amendment Act 2025, particularly the inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf Boards, de-notification of Waqf properties, and collector’s powers in disputes. A possible interim stay is expected.

supreme-court-waqf-amendment-act-2025

Supreme Court Considers Stay on Key Provisions of Waqf Amendment Act 2025

New Delhi, April 17, 2025 – The Supreme Court today expressed serious concerns over several controversial provisions of the recently enacted Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. Among the most debated issues were the inclusion of non-Muslim members in Waqf Boards, de-notification of Waqf properties, and the empowerment of district collectors to adjudicate Waqf disputes.

A three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, alongside Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan, indicated the possibility of an interim stay on select provisions of the law. The matter will be heard again tomorrow at 2 PM.

Key Issues Raised in Supreme Court

1. Waqf by User and Property De-Notification

  • The Court questioned the removal of “waqf by user”—where properties are used historically for Islamic purposes without formal registration.

  • CJI Khanna warned: “If waqf by user is denotified, there are grave ramifications.”

  • The Bench signaled a likely interim order protecting properties already declared Waqf by courts.

2. Inclusion of Non-Muslims in Waqf Boards

  • The 2025 Amendment permits non-Muslims to be appointed to the Central Waqf Council and state Waqf Boards.

  • In a pointed exchange, the Court asked: “Would you allow Muslims on Hindu endowment boards?”

  • Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assured the Court that no more than two non-Muslims would be appointed, aside from ex-officio members.

3. Collector’s Role in Waqf Disputes

  • The amended law grants district collectors the authority to resolve Waqf disputes.

  • Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued this violates the constitutional principle of impartial adjudication, stating: “A collector is a judge in his own cause.”

Heated Exchange: Religion vs. Role

A fiery courtroom exchange between CJI Khanna and SG Mehta underscored the debate’s sensitivity:

  • CJI: “When we sit here, we lose our religion. Both sides are equal before us.”

  • SG Mehta (sarcastically): “Then this Bench also cannot hear the case.”

Petitioners’ Stand

Top advocates challenged the law on constitutional and religious grounds:

  • Kapil Sibal: The Act violates Article 26 – the right of religious denominations to manage their own affairs.

  • Abhishek Manu Singhvi: “Four out of eight lakh Waqfs are based on user. Their de-notification could have a huge impact.”

  • Huzefa Ahmadi: Criticized the clause requiring proof of five years of Islamic practice to establish a Waqf, calling it vague and discriminatory.

Government's Defence

The Centre, represented by SG Mehta, defended the law:

  • The Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 was passed after 38 sessions of Parliament and scrutiny of 98.2 lakh public suggestions.

  • Mehta contended that registration of Waqf properties was always mandatory, even under the original Waqf Act 1995.

Supreme Court May Issue Interim Order

The Bench indicated it may issue a balancing interim order, possibly including:

  • Preventing de-notification of Waqf properties already upheld by courts.

  • Allowing collectors to proceed with cases but not enforce their decisions.

  • Restricting non-Muslim membership in Waqf bodies.

Background: What Is the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025?

The Waqf Amendment Act 2025 aims to regulate Islamic charitable endowments more strictly, modifying the Waqf Act of 1995.
It has been challenged by multiple petitioners, including:

  • Congress MP Mohammad Jawed

  • AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi

The petitioners allege the law violates religious freedom, targets the Muslim community, and gives excessive control to state machinery. On the other hand, six BJP-ruled states have supported the law.

What’s Next?

The hearing resumes tomorrow at 2 PM, with the Supreme Court likely to pass an interim ruling. The outcome may have a significant impact on religious rights, property law, and the autonomy of religious institutions in India.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

India’s Extradition Treaties: How They Impact the Vijay Mallya & Nirav Modi Cases

Introduction Extradition is a critical tool in international law that enables countries to hand over fugitives to jurisdictions where they face criminal charges. India has signed extradition treaties with over 50 countries and extradition arrangements with 11 others to curb financial crimes, terrorism, and other serious offenses. However, high-profile cases like Vijay Mallya and Nirav Modi have tested India's extradition mechanisms and diplomatic relations. This article explores India's extradition laws, its treaties, and the challenges faced in these landmark cases. Understanding Extradition Laws in India 1. The Extradition Act, 1962 The primary legal framework governing extradition in India is T he Extradition Act, 1962 . This Act provides the conditions and procedures for extradition between India and foreign nations. Extradition Treaty Countries : India has formal agreements with over 50 countries , including the UK, USA, UAE, and Canada , which provide a legal basis for...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Role of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in Framing the Indian Constitution

Introduction Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, popularly known as the architect of the Indian Constitution, played a pivotal role in drafting and shaping the fundamental law of independent India. As the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, he was instrumental in laying the foundation of a just, inclusive, and democratic India. His contributions not only ensured legal safeguards for marginalized communities but also established India as a sovereign, socialist, secular, and democratic republic. In this blog, we will explore Dr. Ambedkar’s contributions to the making of the Indian Constitution, his vision, the challenges he faced, and his lasting impact on Indian democracy. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar: A Visionary Leader Born on April 14, 1891, Dr. Ambedkar was a social reformer, economist, and legal expert. His early experiences with caste-based discrimination fueled his determination to uplift the downtrodden and establish a legal system based on equality and justice. He earned multiple degrees, includi...
Post a Comment
Read more

R v. Dudley and Stephens (1884): A Landmark Case on Necessity Defense

Introduction The 1884 case of R v. Dudley and Stephens (14 QBD 273) is one of the most pivotal rulings in English criminal law, specifically regarding the Defense of Necessity in murder cases . This landmark judgment established the legal precedent that necessity cannot be invoked as a defense for murder , even in dire, life-threatening circumstances. Case Background: Survival at Sea In July 1884, Thomas Dudley, Edward Stephens, Brooks, and Richard Parker (a 17-year-old cabin boy) were left adrift after their yacht, Mignonette , sank. For over 20 days, the men survived on limited resources, including turnips and a turtle they managed to catch. As the situation worsened and Parker became gravely weak, Dudley and Stephens resolved to kill and consume Parker in order to survive. Although Brooks abstained from participating in Parker's death, he later consumed Parker's flesh. On the 24th day, the survivors were rescued by a passing ship. Upon their return to England, Dudley and St...
Post a Comment
Read more