The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The court heard for three hours for passing an interim order regarding the law. During the hearing, a bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justice George Augustine Christ said that there is a need to ban law and present a strong case for interim relief. Otherwise the perception of constitutionalism will remain. After hearing the pleas of the petitioner’s lawyers, the Supreme Court has set a hearing on Wednesday to hear the central government’s side.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on behalf of the Center requested the Supreme Court to limit the hearing on three issues identified to pass an interim order. The Center said in the Supreme Court that the three issues include the power to non-oblige to non-obtained assets declared by the courts, Waqf by the user or the deed by the deed. On this, senior advocate Kapil Sibal and others opposing the Waqf Act said that no hearing could be held in pieces.
Sibal, who represents the petitioners challenging the Act, argued that the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 is designed to protect the wakfs, but in fact it is designed to capture the Waqf through a non-judicial, executive process. He said that Waqf is a donation given to Allah and according to this the property cannot be transferred- once Waqf, always Waqf.
‘People will be stopped from praying’
Kapil Sibal said that earlier, although the property was preserved as an ancient monument, the identity of the property did not change due to Waqf and transferred to the government. Now such a wakf property will become zero and once the Waqf becomes zero, people will be stopped from praying. The right to do religious activity independently has been banned.
Court reply
CJI BR Gavai said that people still go to the Khajuraho temple and pray, although it has been preserved as an ancient monument.
The bench postponed the hearing on 15 May till 20 May
A bench of CJI Justice BR Gawai and Justice Augustine George Christ had postponed the hearing on May 15 till 20 May and said that it would hear arguments on three issues, including the power to non-violent the assets declared via courts, users or deeds, to pass the arguments.
The second issue raised by the petitioners is related to the structure of the State Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council, where they argue that only Muslims should work except ex -officio members. The third issue is related to the provision, according to which, when the collector will investigate to find out whether the property is government land or not, Waqf property will not be considered as Waqf. The bench had asked Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of those who challenged the validity of the law, and the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on behalf of the Center to file their written notes by May 19. Lawyers from both sides said that judges may need more time to consider the arguments. Mehta said that in any case, the Center has an assurance that any Waqf property, including the installed assets of the user from Waqf, will not be non-obliged. He had earlier assured that no appointment would be made in the Central Waqf Parishad or State Waqf boards under the new law. The bench clarified that it would not consider any petition to ban the provisions of Waqf Act of 1995 on 20 May.
