{"id":3391,"date":"2025-05-21T21:21:22","date_gmt":"2025-05-21T15:51:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/?p=3391"},"modified":"2026-01-19T05:18:38","modified_gmt":"2026-01-19T05:18:38","slug":"centre-defends-waqf-amendment-in-supreme-court-says-waqf-not-a-fundamental-right-or-essential-to-islam","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/2025\/05\/21\/centre-defends-waqf-amendment-in-supreme-court-says-waqf-not-a-fundamental-right-or-essential-to-islam\/","title":{"rendered":"Centre Defends Waqf Amendment in Supreme Court, Says Waqf \u2018Not a Fundamental Right or Essential to Islam\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>New Delhi: On the second day of day-long hearings on the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, held on Wednesday (May 21), the Union government defended the legislation, arguing that waqf is \u201cnot a fundamental right\u201d nor an \u201cessential\u201d part of Islam.<\/p>\n<p>The matter is being heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih.<\/p>\n<p>Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union government, told the court that, \u201cWaqf by user is not a fundamental right, it was recognised by statute in 1954, and before that in Bengal Act\u2026 A judgment says that if some right is conferred by statute, as legislative policy, right can always be taken away by the State,\u201d Mehta stated, as quoted by Bar and Bench.<\/p>\n<p>Citing B.R. Ambedkar\u2019s speech in the Constituent Assembly, Mehta further argued that waqf is not an essential part of Islam. \u201cWaqf is an Islamic concept, no dispute, but waqf is not an essential part of Islam. Unless that aspect is shown (rest of arguments fail)\u2026 Charity is part of every religion. It is part of Christianity also, but Supreme Court says it is not an essential part\u2026 Hindus have a system of daan, Sikhs also have (charity)\u2026 but it is not an essential part.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWaqf is nothing but just charity in Islam,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n<p>Responding to contentions by the petitioners that the amendment leads to a takeover of waqf properties, Mehta called the allegation \u201cmisleading.\u201d On Tuesday (May 20), Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the petitioners, had argued that the amendment is \u201caimed at capturing the waqf.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Addressing the role of the Central Waqf Council and state waqf boards, Mehta told the bench that these bodies perform \u201csecular\u201d functions and that including non-Muslims in them is permissible.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cFirst, Central Council which issues direction regarding administration and does not deal with waqf which is a mosque, school etc. Waqf Board discharges only secular function \u2013 register maintenance, accounts audited etc. Purely secular,\u201d Mehta said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cHaving maximum two non-Muslim members, would it change any character? Waqf Board is not touching upon any religious activity of any of the waqf. This is the distinction between waqf and other (religious endowments). In Hindu endowments, the Hindu Endowments Commissioner can go inside the temple. Pujaris are appointed by the state,\u201d he added, stating that under Article 25(2)(a), \u201cthere is power to regular secular practices in religion.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The bench has granted another full day to the petitioners to respond to Mehta\u2019s submissions. The hearing will resume tomorrow.<\/p>\n<p>On Tuesday, the petitioners argued that the amended act is discriminatory towards Muslims and constitutes undue interference in Islamic religious practices and the administration of waqf properties.<\/p>\n<p>CJI Gavai had remarked that laws passed by Parliament are presumed to be constitutional and courts can only intervene if a clear and serious issue is demonstrated.<\/p>\n<p>SG Mehta emphasized that the Union government had already submitted its response on the three primary issues and requested the court to limit the hearing to those. \u201cThe written submissions of the petitioners now extend to several other issues. My request is to confine it to the three issues only,\u201d he said, as reported by Hindustan Times.<\/p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has reiterated that no evictions will occur from waqf properties \u201cuntil further notice.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Earlier, on April 17, the Union government had assured the Supreme Court bench, then led by CJI Sanjiv Khanna, that no waqf properties would be denotified until the next hearing. The government also stated that it would not enforce the contested provisions of the amended act, including the inclusion of non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Council and state waqf boards.<\/p>\n<p>Following the retirement of CJI Khanna on May 13, the case is now being heard by the bench of CJI Gavai and Justice Masih.<\/p>\n<p>The amended act has faced strong criticism from opposition leaders, NGOs, and activists, who claim it violates Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to manage religious affairs. The rapid enactment and enforcement of the amendment have reportedly led to unrest in several states, including West Bengal\u2019s Murshidabad district.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>New Delhi: On the second day of day-long hearings on the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, held on Wednesday (May 21), the Union government defended the legislation, arguing &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/2025\/05\/21\/centre-defends-waqf-amendment-in-supreme-court-says-waqf-not-a-fundamental-right-or-essential-to-islam\/\" class=\"more-link\">Read More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3393,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[32,35,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3391","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-inn","category-national","category-uncategorized","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3391","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3391"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3391\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8852,"href":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3391\/revisions\/8852"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3391"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3391"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ichelnewsnetwork.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3391"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}