Supreme Court begins hearing pleas against Waqf (Amendment) Act

Amid violent protests against the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, in West Bengal and other states, the Supreme Court on Wednesday proposed to stay some of its key provisions, including the power to de-notify properties declared as waqf by courts and inclusion of non-Muslims in central Waqf councils and boards. “Ordinarily, courts do not interfere at the admission stage when a law is passed. But this case may warrant an exception. If a property declared as waqf-by-user is de-notified, it can have grave ramifications,” a three-judge Bench led by CJI Sanjiv Khanna said. “The properties declared as waqfs by the courts should not be de-notified—whether they are by waqf-by-user or waqf by deed while the court is hearing the challenge to the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025,” the Bench proposed, saying it will “balance the equities”. Advertisement It also proposed that the proviso of the Amendment Act, as per which a Waqf property will not be treated as a Waqf while the Collector is conducting inquiry—where the property is a Government land—will not be given effect to and that all members of the Waqf Boards and Central Waqf Council must be Muslims, except the ex-officio members. The Bench heard senior lawyers Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Singhvi, Rajeev Dhavan, CU Singh and others for dozens of Muslim bodies and individuals who have challenged the amendment and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the Centre for two hours. Advertisement On behalf of the petitioners, the senior advocates alleged that the amendment infringed upon the religious freedom of Muslims in managing their religious and charitable institutions – a right guaranteed under Article 26 of the Constitution. As CJI Khanna proposed to pass the order, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta vehemently opposed it, saying no such interim order could be passed without hearing the Central Government. The Bench – which also included Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Viswanathan – deferred the hearing to 2 pm on Thursday. It’s yet to issue a formal notice on petitions challenging the amendment. CJI Khanna expressed serious concern over the violence in West Bengal during protests against the amendment. “One thing is very disturbing… the violence that is taking place. If the matter is pending here it should not happen… The issue is before the court and we will decide,” the CJI said before rising for the day. One of the contentious issues was “waqf by user”—a practice where a property is recognised as a Muslim endowment (waqf) based on its long-term, uninterrupted use for such purposes, even if there isn’t a formal, written declaration of waqf by the owner. The second such issue was allowing non-Muslims in governance of waqf properties. The Bench questioned allowing non-Muslims in waqf governance. “Are you suggesting that Muslims could now be part of Hindu endowment boards as well? Please state it openly,” the CJI told Mehta who clarified that not more than two non-Muslim members, apart from ex officio ones, would be included in the waqf council. The Bench pointed out that under the new Act, only eight of the 22 members of the Central Waqf Council would be Muslims. “If eight are Muslims, two may be judges’ who might not be Muslims. That leaves a majority of non-Muslims. How is this consistent with the religious character of the institution?” it asked. “When we sit here, we shed our personal identities. For us, all parties are equal before the law. That comparison is entirely misplaced… Why not allow non-Hindus in the advisory boards of Hindu temples, then?” it asked. Passed by the Rajya Sabha during the wee hours of April 4 with 128 members voting in favour and 95 opposing it, the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2025 received President Murmu’s assent on April 5. The Lok Sabha passed the Bill on April 3 with 288 members supporting it and 232 against it. The Centre notified it on April 8. Under the amended law only self-owned resources can be declared as Waqf after ensuring the inheritance rights of women and children and the DC will determine that land being donated by a Muslim is actually in his ownership. It also empowers state governments to nominate members, including representatives from backward classes and both Shia and Sunni communities to Waqf boards. The petitioners, including AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi and Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind president Arshad Madani, RJD MP Manoj Jha, AAP MLA in Delhi Amanatullah Khan, Association for Protection of Civil Rights, Samastha Kerala Jamiyyathul Ulama, CPI, DMK Tamil actor-turned-politician Vijay and YSRCP, alleged that the amended law imposed “arbitrary restrictions” on Waqf properties and their management, undermining the religious autonomy of the Muslim community and took away various protections accorded to Waqfs and discriminated against Muslims. However, a petition filed by Hari Shankar Jain on Tuesday submitted that the impugned provisions conferred undue benefits on Muslims and discriminated against non-Muslims, the petitioners submitted. Governments of six BJP-ruled states of Assam, Haryana, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand and Maharashtra on Monday moved the Supreme Court in support of the amendment.