The Supreme Court is closely examining the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. A constitutional bench is hearing a series of petitions challenging the amended law. The matter has triggered heated debates across the country.
Government defends the law
The Centre defended the amendment, stating it brings transparency to waqf property management. It argued that declaring a property as waqf must follow proper registration, a rule dating back to 1923. The law, the government says, aims to end misuse and undocumented control of land under religious pretexts.
The Centre also maintained that waqf is not an essential religious practice. Hence, legal reforms in its management don’t violate religious rights.
Petitioners cry foul
Petitioners, including lawmakers and community representatives, have questioned the legality of the amended Act. Their primary concerns are:
- The inclusion of non-Muslim members in Waqf Boards.
- The authority granted to the Waqf Board to declare private land as waqf.
- The threat to constitutional rights under Article 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs).
- Political interference in religious endowments.
They argue that these changes dilute religious autonomy and violate secular principles.
Judges raise sharp questions
The bench questioned the practicality of the new rules. How can centuries-old mosques produce sale deeds? What happens when a Waqf Board unilaterally claims land? Can someone easily challenge a waqf declaration?
The court expressed concern that reversing false waqf claims could be impossible for landowners who lack old legal documents. It also raised eyebrows at the appointment of non-Muslims to a Board meant for managing Islamic endowments.
The court has so far not issued an interim order but stated that no de-notification of properties already validated by courts should occur during the hearings.
Protests Erupt Across States
The issue has sparked protests in several states. Demonstrators accuse the government of targeting Muslim institutions. There are claims that the Act is part of a broader agenda to control minority assets and silence religious voices.
Some groups have even called the move “unconstitutional” and “anti-minority.”
What happens next?
The hearings will continue in the coming weeks. The judgment is expected to impact:
- Future of religious land rights.
- Political control over minority institutions.
- Clarity over what qualifies as waqf property.
For now, the nation watches as the court weighs religion, rights, and reforms.
