New Delhi : A Supreme Court Bench headed by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih is set to hear today a series of petitions challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The amendments are being opposed by over a hundred petitioners, who contend that they undermine the constitutional and religious rights of Muslims to manage their own religious affairs and waqf properties, reported the Hindu.
The matter was earlier heard by a Special Bench led by former CJI Sanjiv Khanna on May 5. Justice Khanna had expressed his inability to deliver an interim order before his retirement on May 13, prompting the court to list the case for May 15 under the newly constituted Bench.
The petitioners argue that the amendments, particularly the removal of the concept of ‘waqf-by-user’ and the inclusion of non-Muslim members in the Waqf Board and Central Waqf Council, interfere with the Muslim community’s right to religious autonomy. They assert that these changes threaten the historical and spiritual character of Islamic endowments, which are meant to be perpetually dedicated to Allah for religious or charitable use.
In a significant development during the April 17 hearing, the then Bench had secured a statement from the Centre assuring that the character or status of waqf properties would not be altered under the new law. However, the government later filed an affidavit defending the amendments, citing a “phenomenal increase” in waqf assets between 2013 and 2024 and alleging misuse of waqf laws to encroach upon government and private land.
While the Centre maintains the changes are aimed at curbing illegalities and improving governance, the petitioners believe the amendments were rushed through without proper consultation and violate the minority rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
With no Muslim judges currently on the new Bench and key earlier members like Justices Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan no longer part of the hearing, the outcome of today’s proceedings may shape the legal and political future of the contentious law.
The court had earlier converted the batch of over 100 petitions into a suo motu case to prevent repetitive filings.
