New Delhi, September 15, 2025 – The Supreme Court has refused to suspend the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in its entirety, but imposed a partial interim stay on key provisions. A bench led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih held that while Parliament enjoys wide legislative powers, clauses affecting religious identity and executive overreach required closer scrutiny.
Key Provisions Stayed
- Five-year “practising Muslim” rule: The requirement that only a Muslim practising the faith for at least five years could dedicate property as Waqf. The Court said such religious tests could restrict fundamental rights.
- District collectors as adjudicators: Vesting land dispute powers in collectors was struck down temporarily, citing the doctrine of separation of powers. Only specialized tribunals should handle such cases.
Provisions Clarified but Not Stayed
- Non-Muslim representation limits: Central Waqf Council capped at 4 non-Muslims, State Boards at 3 non-Muslims. Court said this was within Parliament’s discretion.
- Non-Muslim CEOs: Appointment permitted, but Court suggested Muslim leadership in spirit of tradition.
Background
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 was introduced to:
- Digitize Waqf records and reduce land misuse.
- Curb “Waqf by user” claims (where long public use converted property into Waqf).
- Increase transparency in property management.
- Include non-Muslims and women in boards and councils.
Petitioners argued that removing “Waqf by user” would harm long-standing community practices and that faith-based eligibility rules were arbitrary and exclusionary.
Key Statements
- CJI B.R. Gavai: “Presumption is always in favour of constitutionality… no prima facie case to stay the entire statute.”
- Kiren Rijiju, Parliamentary Affairs Minister: “This upholds Parliament’s decision and is a win for democracy.”
- Imran Pratapgarhi, Congress MP: Called the ruling “a relief for donors fearing land grabs under the guise of executive powers.”
Reactions
- Legal experts: Hailed the ruling as “balanced judicial restraint” – preserving legislative purpose but safeguarding individual freedoms.
- Muslim law boards & civil rights groups: Celebrated the suspension of the “practising Muslim” clause and executive control.
- Business/property analysts: Noted reduced land insecurity risk for owners until tribunals issue rulings.
- Political impact: Opposition found relief, protests cooled, and the government avoided a full judicial rebuke.
FAQs
Q1: What is the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025?
A law passed to reform Waqf property management by digitizing records, preventing misuse, and expanding inclusivity in Waqf boards.
Q2: Which provisions did the Supreme Court stay?
- Five-year practising Muslim rule for donors.
- Collector’s power to adjudicate land disputes.
Q3: Is the entire Act invalid now?
No. The Court only stayed selective provisions; the rest of the Act continues to operate.
Q4: What happens to Waqf-by-user claims?
The removal of “Waqf by user” is still valid, pending further hearing.
Q5: Can non-Muslims still serve on Waqf boards?
Yes. The Court allowed caps on representation (max. 4 in Central Council, 3 in State Boards).
Q6: Why did the Court not stay the whole law?
Because of the principle of judicial restraint: unless a law is clearly unconstitutional, courts avoid blocking an entire statute.
Q7: What’s the impact on property owners?
Immediate protection against arbitrary takeover by district collectors; disputes will go before tribunals instead.
Related Articles
Leave a Reply