The Supreme Court will on Thursday continue hearing a series of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The bench, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan, is set to take up the matter at 2 p.m., a day after intense arguments and concerns marked the proceedings.
On Wednesday, the top court considered issuing a short interim order, but deferred the move after the Centre and several states requested additional time to present their arguments. The court, however, flagged three major areas of concern under the new law: the invalidation of properties earlier declared as Waqf by court decrees, the inclusion of non-Muslim members in Waqf Boards, and the power granted to district collectors to de-notify disputed Waqf land.
During the hearing, CJI Khanna expressed unease over the violent protests that have erupted in West Bengal in response to the law. “The matter is before us. This kind of violence should not happen,” he observed, referring to recent unrest in Murshidabad that claimed several lives.
The court also posed pointed questions to the Centre. One of the most significant was whether it was constitutionally sound to allow non-Muslims a majority in the Waqf Council, especially when such representation would not be reciprocated in the case of Hindu religious trusts. “Can non-Muslims govern a body that deals exclusively with Islamic endowments?” the bench asked.
Another critical issue debated was the clause eliminating “Waqf by user”—a long-recognised practice wherein properties used uninterruptedly for religious or charitable purposes were considered Waqf, even without formal documentation. “Many of these properties won’t have formal paperwork. By eliminating this, you may be undoing historical and judicial recognition,” the bench said, citing even colonial-era legal precedents.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, countered that the law had undergone extensive review. He pointed out that a Joint Parliamentary Committee had held 38 sittings and examined nearly one crore public submissions before the law was passed. The amendment received presidential assent on April 5.
Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the legislation imposes unreasonable restrictions and religious tests. Sibal challenged the clause that permits only Muslims who have practised the faith for five years to create Waqf. “Can the government decide who is Muslim enough to create a Waqf?” he asked.
Singhvi opposed the idea of referring the matter to a high court, saying that the implications of the law are national and require central adjudication by the Supreme Court. Another petitioner, senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, defended “Waqf by user” as a legitimate Islamic practice that must not be legislated out of existence.
Must Read: Murshidabad Violence: SIT Formed As Supreme Court Flags Concerns Over Waqf Law Protests