Supreme Court to Hear Challenges to Waqf (Amendment) Act on April 16
The Supreme Court of India is set to hear a series of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, on April 16. A bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan will preside over the hearing.
Supreme Court to Examine Waqf Law Amendments
The 2025 amendment to the Waqf Act has sparked significant opposition for what many critics believe is an overreach into minority religious autonomy. The amended legislation eliminates the concept of ‘waqf by user’, meaning that land can no longer be declared waqf simply because it has been used as such over a long period. Under the revised law, only land officially endowed or declared as waqf will be recognized.
It also mandates that donors must have been Muslims for at least five years before dedicating property for waqf purposes, and it strengthens provisions ensuring that women are not denied inheritance rights in waqf property.
Waqf Amendment Sparks Political and Legal Backlash
A wide spectrum of political leaders and religious organizations have taken legal action against the new law. Congress MPs Mohammad Jawed and Imran Pratapgarhi, AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, DMK’s A. Raja, and AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi are among the petitioners. Several prominent Islamic institutions, including the All India Muslim Personal Law Board and Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, have also filed petitions.
Asaduddin Owaisi declared, “The Act is manifestly arbitrary, perpetuates discrimination on grounds of religion, violates the Shariat Act and strips the Muslim community of the right to manage its own religious institutions.”
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board echoed these concerns, stating that it “strongly objected to the amendments passed by Parliament for being ‘arbitrary, discriminatory and based on exclusion.'”
Legal Challenge to Test Minority Rights and Religious Autonomy
The petitioners argue that the Waqf (Amendment) Act curtails religious freedom, infringes on the autonomy of Muslim institutions, and facilitates state interference. By including non-Muslims in waqf boards and shifting greater control to government officials, the petitioners believe the law undermines the community’s ability to manage its religious and charitable assets.
The Central Government, anticipating the legal challenge, has filed a caveat in the Supreme Court requesting that no order be passed without hearing its side. It maintains that the amendments aim to promote transparency, accountability, and prevent misuse of waqf properties.
As the Supreme Court readies for this crucial hearing, the case is expected to test the limits of religious rights, minority protections, and the constitutional balance between state oversight and community autonomy.
