The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, passed by Parliament on April 4, 2025, and signed into law by the President on April 5, has led to significant legal and political friction across India. Following its enforcement on April 8, 72 petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Act have been filed in the Supreme Court of India, with political leaders, religious organizations, and civil society raising strong objections.

At the forefront of the legal resistance are prominent figures and bodies like AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, DMK, and Congress MPs Imran Pratapgarhi and Mohammad Jawed. They argue that the amendments interfere with the autonomy of religious endowments, especially waqf properties, and pose a threat to the secular fabric of the Constitution.

Centre Seeks Time to Respond

During the second day of the hearing on April 17, the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Central Government, requested one week’s time from the Supreme Court to submit a preliminary reply along with relevant supporting documents. He assured the bench that no appointments to the Central Waqf Council or the State Waqf Boards would be made in the interim.

The bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and comprising Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan, raised pointed questions during the hearing. The CJI notably remarked, “When we sit on this bench, we lose our religion,” in response to the Centre's analogy about religious representation on judicial benches and its defense of appointing non-Muslims to the Waqf Boards.

Key Issues Raised in Court

The Supreme Court expressed serious concern about the controversial provisions of the Act, particularly:

• Inclusion of non-Muslims in Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards.

• Empowerment of District Collectors to decide disputes over waqf property.

• De-notification of waqf properties previously declared as such by courts.

Petitioners argue that these provisions violate Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantee freedom of religion and the right to manage religious affairs. The inclusion of non-Muslim members in Muslim religious endowment bodies was especially contentious, with petitioners stating it undermines the core religious character of these institutions.

Political and Public Repercussions

The Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, has not only ignited courtroom debates but also led to widespread public protests. The most severe of these occurred in Murshidabad, West Bengal, where demonstrations turned violent on April 11, leading to the deaths of three people, several injuries, and property damage, including the torching of vehicles.

In response, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee announced a compensation of ₹10 lakh to the families of those who lost their lives and assistance under the Banglar Bari scheme for those who lost homes. She accused the Central Government, particularly the BJP, of pushing a divisive agenda through the Waqf legislation, linking it with alleged intelligence reports citing Bangladesh’s involvement in stirring unrest.

SC’s Observation on Waqf Land Takeovers

During the hearing, Solicitor General Mehta further claimed that "village after village" was being taken over as Waqf, sparking broader concerns about land rights and state control. The bench refrained from passing any interim orders, but acknowledged the urgency and significance of the case, indicating that key provisions could be stayed pending a detailed review.

The case is being closely watched for its broader implications on the separation of state and religion, the scope of secular governance, and the rights of minority communities to manage their religious institutions.

NDA vs Opposition on the Act

The political divide over the Act is deepening. BJP MP Jagdambika Pal, chairperson of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the Act, defended its provisions, arguing that objections about non-Muslim members had already been addressed. He cited earlier court cases like Ramjas Foundation vs Union of India and the Karnataka Waqf Board case, which established that Waqf Boards are statutory bodies, not religious ones.

Meanwhile, Mamata Banerjee continued to attack NDA allies, especially Nitish Kumar and Chandrababu Naidu, accusing them of being silent on the controversial legislation. Addressing a gathering of Muslim religious leaders in Kolkata, she questioned their support for the Act in Parliament and raised concerns about the Centre’s handling of border security, citing reports that cross-border elements may have influenced the protests.

Next Hearing Scheduled

The hearing on the Waqf Amendment Act will resume on Thursday, with the court expecting a detailed response from the Centre and further arguments from the petitioners. The Supreme Court is yet to decide on whether it will issue an interim stay on the provisions under challenge.

With legal, political, and public scrutiny intensifying, the outcome of this case could reshape the regulatory landscape for religious endowments in India. It is a pivotal moment that underscores the delicate balance between state authority, religious freedom, and constitutional morality in the world’s largest democracy.

Start your Stock Market Journey and Apply in IPO by Opening Free Demat Account in Choice Broking FinX.

Join our Trading with CA Abhay Telegram Channel for regular Stock Market Trading and Investment Calls by CA Abhay Varn - SEBI Registered Research Analyst.