Supreme Court Intensifies Scrutiny of Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 Amid Nationwide Tensions
New Delhi, April 16, 2025 — The Supreme Court on Wednesday resumed its crucial hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025. The case has captured national attention, as debates around religious autonomy, secularism, and property rights converge in the courtroom.
The day began with Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna, along with Justices Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan, presiding over the hearing. Senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Rajeev Dhawan, and CU Singh represented the petitioners, which include a mix of political leaders and civil rights groups. Ten petitions have been filed, among them by AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi, AAP leader Amanatullah Khan, and RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha. Recently, TMC MP Mahua Moitra and Samajwadi Party’s Zia-ur-Rahman Barq also moved the court with fresh pleas.
As the arguments began, the CJI posed an initial question to the petitioners: should the apex court hear the matter or refer it to the High Courts? Senior counsel Abhishek Singhvi argued strongly against decentralizing the case, pointing out that the implications of the law are nationwide and need unified judicial interpretation.
Kapil Sibal opened his arguments by asserting that the amended Waqf law infringes upon Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs. He took specific aim at the provision allowing non-Muslim members in Waqf boards, calling it a “direct violation” of Islamic faith and a “parliamentary overreach.”
Chief Justice Khanna responded to Sibal by referring to similar legislative actions in Hinduism, indicating that Parliament had previously enacted laws for religious trusts and communities. He maintained that Article 26, being secular in nature, does not prevent Parliament from legislating on religious property management as long as it doesn’t infringe upon core tenets.
The debate intensified when Sibal cited the new requirement under Section 3R of the amended Act — where a person must prove they have been practicing Islam for the past five years to create a waqf. “Who is the State to judge my faith?” Sibal questioned, expressing deep concerns over the bureaucratic lens being applied to religious expression.
Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi highlighted that “waqf by user” is a well-established practice in Islam and warned that the amendment appears to strip this tradition of its legal sanctity. The court, however, proposed a temporary order that no waqf properties, including those recognized through “waqf by user,” be de-notified during the pendency of the hearings — a suggestion the Centre opposed.
Another point of contention emerged when the court acknowledged that ex-officio members of the Waqf Board may be appointed regardless of faith. However, all other members must be Muslims. The court seemed to balance this technicality with broader constitutional concerns.
Outside the courtroom, the political atmosphere remained charged. West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee lashed out against the Centre, alleging that the communal violence in Murshidabad district was “pre-planned.” She accused the BSF and BJP of allowing cross-border entry from Bangladesh to incite unrest, and demanded that Prime Minister Narendra Modi restrain Union Home Minister Amit Shah, whom she blamed for fueling political tension.
In contrast, the BJP claimed that Hindus in Bengal were facing targeted attacks and accused the Mamata-led government of turning a blind eye. BJP leader Ravi Shankar Prasad warned that the recent incidents signaled the beginning of the end for the TMC regime and pledged continued support to riot victims in Murshidabad.
The nationwide protests against the Act also sparked violence in Assam, where seven people were arrested after clashes with police during an unauthorized protest in Cachar district. Authorities have imposed prohibitory orders to prevent further disturbances.
The legal and political storm around the Waqf (Amendment) Act shows no signs of settling, with six BJP-ruled states — Haryana, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, and Assam — having already come forward in support of the Act’s constitutionality. Haryana, in particular, argued that Waqf property management urgently needs reform.