On Wednesday, April 16, 2025, the Supreme Court is expected to consider a number of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, including one filed by AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi.
Ten petitions on the matter have been listed as far by a three-judge panel that includes Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justices Sanjay Kumar, and K.V. Viswanathan.
The petitions submitted by AAP leader Amanatullah Khan, the Association for the Protection of Civil Rights, Arshad Madani, Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema, Anjum Kadari, Taiyyab Khan Salmani, Mohammad Shafi, Mohammed Fazlurrahim, and RJD leader Manoj Kumar Jha were scheduled for hearing by the court in addition to Mr. Owaisi’s plea.
Zia-ur-Rahman Barq, a Sambhal Sammajwadi Party MP, and TMC MP Mahua Moitra filed some of the subsequent fresh pleas that have not yet been placed in the highest court.
The Communist Party of India (CPI), the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president, actor-turned-politician Vijay, and the YSRCP, led by former Andhra Pradesh president Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy, have also filed a case in the highest court.
The CJI consented to list the statute after advocate Hari Shankar Jain and a man named Mani Munjal filed a separate case contesting the constitutionality of several of its provisions on the grounds that they infringe upon the fundamental rights of non-Muslims.
Before any ruling was made in the case, the Center requested a hearing and filed a caveat at the highest court on April 8.
To make sure that no orders are issued without first being heard, a party files a caveat in both the high courts and the supreme court.
Other important petitioners include Congress MPs Imran Pratapgarhi and Mohammad Jawed, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB).
Senior counsel Kapil Sibal, speaking on behalf of Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, was informed by a bench led by the CJI on April 7 that the petitions will be taken into consideration for listing.
States support the law
Six BJP-ruled states, including Madhya Pradesh and Assam, have filed an appeal with the Supreme Court to uphold the legality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, which is a noteworthy move.
Haryana, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, and Assam, the six BJP-ruled states, have each submitted a separate plea, emphasizing the possible legal and administrative repercussions in the event that the Waqf (Amendment) Act is overturned or modified.
The urgent need for reform in the administration of Waqf property was emphasized by Haryana, which filed the intervention in the lead petition.
The state government cited ongoing problems such irregular or absent records of property changes, long-pending cases in Waqf tribunals, insufficient property surveys, and improper accounting.
It stated that the goal of the modified law is to guarantee better supervision of Mutawallis (custodians) and to establish a consistent framework for Waqf management.
The Maharashtra government argued that it is essential to support the supreme court by supplying committee recommendations, parliamentary documents, and information from nationwide consultations.
Along with concrete evidence exposing abuse and a lack of openness in the Waqf administration, it also pledged to exchange comparative frameworks of religious endowment laws throughout India.
Madhya Pradesh’s argument states that the Waqf law seeks to significantly alter the way Waqf properties are governed and regulated.
The state emphasized that the law aims to create a technologically advanced, legally sound system that encourages accountability, transparency, and the socioeconomic advancement of its intended beneficiaries.
The government of Rajasthan expressed worry over previous procedures that declared properties, whether privately owned or state-owned, Waqf assets without following the necessary procedures.
By requiring a 90-day public notice in two widely read newspapers prior to any such announcement, the new requirements, it was claimed, rectify this.
This move, Rajasthan contended, ensures transparency and procedural fairness by giving affected stakeholders a chance to raise objections.
In their appeal, Chhattisgarh emphasized how crucial it is to streamline administrative processes and enhance communication between local government and Waqf boards.
According to the administration, the establishment of a digital portal for Waqf property management will improve asset tracking, identification, and auditing, ultimately enhancing financial practices’ transparency.
Section 3E of the revised Act, which prohibits the designation of land in Scheduled or Tribal Areas—which are protected by the Fifth or Sixth Schedule of the Constitution—as Waqf property, was brought to light by Assam’s argument.
The state argued that it has a direct interest in the case’s result because eight of its 35 districts are listed in the Sixth Schedule.
In addition, the Uttarakhand Waqf Board, which has been in favor of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, has applied to the Supreme Court for permission to get involved in Owaisi’s writ case contesting the law’s constitutionality.
With 128 members voting in favor of the bill and 95 against, it was approved by the Rajya Sabha. With 288 members in favor and 232 against, it was approved by the Lok Sabha.
