Breaking Down The News: What the Supreme Court’s Waqf Hearing Means for the New Law
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, has been one of the most talked-about laws in recent weeks. It was passed by Parliament to bring more accountability and fairness in how waqf properties are managed. But now, the Supreme Court is hearing several petitions challenging parts of this law. Some people thought the law might be cancelled or stopped. So what really happened in court on April 16?
Let’s break it down simply.
The Law Is Still Active
First of all, the new Waqf law has not been cancelled. It’s still valid and in force. The Supreme Court has not put a stay on the law. This means most of the changes introduced by the amendment are still working—like auditing big waqf institutions, removing the “waqf by user” clause, and asking for proper documents to prove waqf ownership.
What Is Waqf?
For those who are new to this, “waqf” means property that is donated by Muslims for religious or charitable use—like mosques, graveyards, schools, etc. These properties are managed by special boards called Waqf Boards.
The old law gave these Boards a lot of power, sometimes without clear checks. For example, if a piece of land had been used like a mosque for a long time—even without any documents—it could be declared a waqf. This caused many land disputes, even with government land.
What Did the Supreme Court Say?
The Court listened to several petitioners who felt the new law was unfair to Muslims. After hearing them, the Court said it may pass an interim order to make sure nobody is hurt while the case is being heard. But this was not a final decision. It’s more like a “pause” on certain parts, not a complete stop.
The Court made three main suggestions:
1. If a property was already declared waqf by a court or has legal documents, it should not be removed from the waqf list while the case goes on.
Example: If a mosque was declared waqf by a court in 1990, it won’t be affected immediately by the new law.
2. The rule saying waqf claims should be put on hold if the government is checking if the land is public should not apply right now.
Example: If there is a question whether a land belongs to the government or to waqf, that land will not be treated as non-waqf just because a district officer is checking it.
3. All members of Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council (except government officers) should be Muslims.
The Court seemed unsure if including non-Muslims in Waqf Boards is a good idea. It might affect religious independence.
What Happens Next?
The case is not over. The Court will hear more arguments on April 17, 2025. Today’s suggestions are only temporary. The Court is trying to protect existing properties from sudden changes until it makes a final decision.
So, for now:
The law is still in effect.
Most of the reforms are working.
Only a few parts are being watched closely.
The final judgment could take weeks or even months.
What Does It Mean for Regular Citizens?
This law is not about hurting any religion. It’s about making sure that properties meant for charity and worship are well-managed and legally documented. Think of it this way: if a temple, church, or gurdwara has to follow certain rules to manage land and money, why should the waqf system be any different?
The Court is just doing its job—checking if the law fits within the Constitution. But unless it finds a very serious violation, the law is likely to stay. And that’s a good thing if we want all religious trusts to follow the same basic standards of honesty and legality.
