National desk 16 april
In the Supreme Court today, the petitions challenging the validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 were heard in the Supreme Court. Several political parties and social organizations have filed petitions against the Act, including organizations like Congress, DMK, Aam Aadmi Party, AIMIM, YSRCP and All India Muslim Personal Law Board. The case was heard by three judges of Chief Justice (CJI) Sanjeev Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Vishwanathan.
A sharp debate between the court and the central government
The Chief Justice asked that “How will the Waqf by user registration? Who will decide that the property has been declared a Waqf?” He further stated that “Waqf law has been misused in the past, but the Waqf by user does not seem to be completely right. The Privy Council also recognized it in the British period.” On this, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta replied on behalf of the government: The new law allows Muslims to create their own trusts. It is no longer mandatory to hand over the vaqf property.
The Central Waqf Council is an advisory institution, it consists of the people named by the Center. The council will also include two former judges, Shia and Muslims of other classes, and two Muslim women. A maximum of 2 members out of a total of 22 members can be non-Muslim. When SG said, “According to this you too cannot hear the matter,” then CJI said clearly, “Don’t compare like this.We judges make decisions above such things.
The Supreme Court has issued a notice to the Center and ordered to file a written reply (affidavit) in two weeks. SG assured the court that “We will file answers in two weeks.Kapil Sibal said during the hearing of the case that this Waqf law is against the Constitution. This article violates 25 and 26. Waqf law is injustice to 200 million people. He said that this law interferes in religious matters. It also transcends basic needs. Several senior lawyers were present in the court during the hearing, including Asaduddin Owaisi, Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and prominent names like Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.
Sibal said that the right to property in Islam is found after death on the basis of succession. In such a situation, the government should not intervene under the Waqf Act.
He said that according to Section 3 (C) of the Waqf Act, if any government land is declared as Waqf, then that law will not be considered as Waqf.
Sibal questioned Section 3 (A) (2), which can exclude women from heritage under Waqf-al-Aulad. He asked, “Who is the state who decides
The CJI said that Article 26 gives freedom to all religions. The government has also enacted laws for the Hindu community, such as the administration of temples.
Justice KV Vishwanathan said that properties can be secular rather than religion. Their administration is necessary, but it cannot be called part of the religious practice.
The CJI questioned whether there is no law in which the property of Scheduled Tribes cannot be transferred without permission? On this, Sibal said that he has a chart in which it is shown that all Muslims have been considered as Scheduled Tribes. Sibal said that under the Waqf Act of 1995, all members were Muslims. But this is not the case in the new revised law. According to Section 9, out of 22 members, only 10 will be MuslimsThe CJI overturned and said that look at other provisions as well. It is not necessary that all are non-Muslim. Sibal said that this is a violation of the articles of the Constitution directly. The CJI said that if a monument has been declared archaeologically preserved, it cannot be Waqf, but if already Waqf is declared, it will remain Waqf. Significantly, AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, AAP party’s Amanatullah Khan, Dharmaguru Maulana Arshad Madni, RJD leader Manoj Jha, All India Muslim Personal Law Board and Jamiat-e-Ulama-e-Hind have filed about two dozen (24) petitions in the Supreme Court. Overall, more than 70 petitions have been filed in the court to challenge the Waqf Amendment Act.
