The Crossbill Team
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (April 16) reserved its order on a series of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The hearing will resume at 2 PM on Thursday, April 17.
During the hearing, the bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna posed a critical question to the Union government, asking whether it would be open to including Muslims in Hindu religious endowment boards—similar to the provision allowing non-Muslims on Waqf Boards under the new law.
"Mr Mehta, are you saying that from now on you will allow Muslims to be part of the Hindu endowment boards. Say it openly!," CJI Khanna asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, reported Bar and Bench.
The controversial legislation, which amends the original Waqf Act, was passed in the Lok Sabha on April 3 with 288 votes in favour and 232 against, and subsequently cleared in the Rajya Sabha on April 4 by 128 to 95 votes. The amendments have sparked widespread legal and political backlash, with over 100 petitions filed before the apex court.
Among the petitioners are prominent political and civil society figures including AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi, AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha, and organisations like the Association for Protection of Civil Rights and the Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema.
Representing the petitioners, senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the amendments infringe upon Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs in matters of religion.
Sibal told the bench that allowing non-Muslims on the Waqf Council undermines the essential religious character of waqf institutions.
“Let me broadly address what the challenge is about. Through a parliamentary legislation what is sought to be done is to intervene in an essential and integral part of a faith. I refer to Article 26. Many provisions of the Act violate Article 26,” he said, calling several provisions of the amended law “pernicious” and seeking an immediate stay on specific sections that have already come into force.
Mehta defended the legislation, noting that it had been vetted by a joint parliamentary committee and approved by both Houses of Parliament.
The bench also expressed concern over the retroactive application of the Act, particularly in cases where land has historically been declared waqf by user.
“You cannot rewrite the past,” said the CJI, cautioning against attempts to denotify such properties arbitrarily. He added that reversing centuries-old waqf declarations could lead to serious complications.
In a possible interim measure, the bench proposed that any property declared as waqf by a court—regardless of whether it was waqf by user—should not be denotified. It also suggested that while ex-officio members may continue to be appointed to Waqf Boards and Councils, other members should remain from the Muslim community.
The court also condemned instances of violence following the passage of the law, calling the situation “very disturbing.”
During the hearing, the bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna posed a critical question to the Union government, asking whether it would be open to including Muslims in Hindu religious endowment boards—similar to the provision allowing non-Muslims on Waqf Boards under the new law.
"Mr Mehta, are you saying that from now on you will allow Muslims to be part of the Hindu endowment boards. Say it openly!," CJI Khanna asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, reported Bar and Bench.
The controversial legislation, which amends the original Waqf Act, was passed in the Lok Sabha on April 3 with 288 votes in favour and 232 against, and subsequently cleared in the Rajya Sabha on April 4 by 128 to 95 votes. The amendments have sparked widespread legal and political backlash, with over 100 petitions filed before the apex court.
Among the petitioners are prominent political and civil society figures including AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi, AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha, and organisations like the Association for Protection of Civil Rights and the Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema.
Representing the petitioners, senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the amendments infringe upon Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs in matters of religion.
Sibal told the bench that allowing non-Muslims on the Waqf Council undermines the essential religious character of waqf institutions.
“Let me broadly address what the challenge is about. Through a parliamentary legislation what is sought to be done is to intervene in an essential and integral part of a faith. I refer to Article 26. Many provisions of the Act violate Article 26,” he said, calling several provisions of the amended law “pernicious” and seeking an immediate stay on specific sections that have already come into force.
Mehta defended the legislation, noting that it had been vetted by a joint parliamentary committee and approved by both Houses of Parliament.
The bench also expressed concern over the retroactive application of the Act, particularly in cases where land has historically been declared waqf by user.
“You cannot rewrite the past,” said the CJI, cautioning against attempts to denotify such properties arbitrarily. He added that reversing centuries-old waqf declarations could lead to serious complications.
In a possible interim measure, the bench proposed that any property declared as waqf by a court—regardless of whether it was waqf by user—should not be denotified. It also suggested that while ex-officio members may continue to be appointed to Waqf Boards and Councils, other members should remain from the Muslim community.
The court also condemned instances of violence following the passage of the law, calling the situation “very disturbing.”
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment