The Supreme Court of India has scheduled a hearing for May 20 to consider interim relief in a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. A bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih will assess whether an interim stay is necessary concerning three key provisions of the amendment.
The issues under judicial scrutiny include: the removal of ‘waqf by user’ from the statutory definition, the nomination of non-Muslims to the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards, and the identification of government land as waqf property. The Court has stated it will allocate two hours to each side during the upcoming hearing.
Meanwhile, the Central government’s previous assurance—conveyed by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta—that it will refrain from implementing the contested provisions, remains in effect until further orders.
The Act, which amends the Waqf Act, 1995, was passed by the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on April 3 and 4 respectively, and received Presidential assent on April 5. It aims to revise the regulatory framework governing waqf properties, which are traditionally dedicated for religious or charitable purposes under Islamic law.
Multiple petitions have been filed challenging the Act, including those by Congress MP Mohammad Jawed and AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi. The petitioners argue that the amendments discriminate against Muslims and infringe upon their religious rights under Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees communities the freedom to manage their own religious affairs.
In contrast, six BJP-ruled states—Haryana, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, and Assam—have intervened in support of the Act, citing concerns over public land disputes and administrative clarity.
Central to the controversy is the deletion of ‘waqf by user,’ a long-recognized concept under which historical religious sites were treated as waqf despite lacking formal deeds. Petitioners fear that this change would endanger the status of age-old mosques and graveyards.
Defending the law, the Union government claims the amendment addresses misuse of waqf provisions to unjustly claim public and private property. It asserts that the removal of ‘waqf by user’ does not prevent religious dedication but mandates adherence to statutory forms of registration.
The upcoming hearing will determine whether temporary protection is warranted as the broader constitutional challenge proceeds.
