By Admin 
Supreme Court on Waqf Amendment Bill 2025: The Supreme Court on Wednesday (April 16, 2025) started hearing on petitions challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The bench of Chief Justice (CJI) Sanjeev Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Vishwanathan is hearing the case. The court did not pass any interim order and will resume the hearing on Thursday, 17 April.
Ten petitions were listed in front of the back. More than 15 petitions have been filed by religious institutions, members of Parliament, political parties, states challenging the 2025 Act. Five BJP -led states: Assam, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Haryana and Maharashtra have filed intervention applications supporting this law. On April 8, the Center filed a cavity in the Supreme Court requesting that no order be passed without listening to its side.
Supreme Court’s big comments during today’s hearing
1- During Wednesday’s debate, CJI Khanna expressed concern about how some properties have been classified as Waqf. Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna said, “We have been told that the Delhi High Court building is on the land of Waqf, Oberoi Hotel is on the land of Waqf.
2- Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioners, presented his arguments. He argued that under Islamic law, the inheritance comes only after death and the government is now trying to intervene before that. Reacting to Sibal’s remarks, CJI Khanna said, “But this happens in Hindus. So Parliament has enacted a law for Muslims. It may not be like a law for Hindus. Article 26 will not stop making laws in this case. Article 26 is universal and it is secular in the sense that it applies to all.”
3- During his arguments, Sibal cited the provision (Section 3C), according to which, the property identified as government property will not be a Waqf property and the government’s authority will decide the dispute. Sibal then mentioned Section 3D, which calls the construction of Waqf invalid on the preserved monuments from ASI. On this, the CJI said that according to the provision, if property was a protected monument at the time of construction of Waqf, then such Waqf would be invalid. CJI Khanna asked, “How many such cases will be there?” Sibal replied, “Jama Masjid.” However, the CJI said that the Jama Masjid was later notified as a protected monument.
According to Live Law, the CJI said, “I think the interpretation is in your favor. If it is declared a Waqf before declaring it an ancient monument, it will not make any difference. It will remain a vaqf, you should not object until it can be declared Waqf after declaring it preserved. Most of the monuments, ancient mosques, will not be affected by this section.”
4- Sibal also talked about Section 9, 14 related to the nomination of non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Parishad and State Waqf boards. Sibal said that this is a direct violation of Article 26. Sibal argued that the central law related to Sikhs and Hindu religious settlement related to gurdwaras and many state laws related to laws do not allow people of other religions to include people. Sibal also objected to the provisions that make registration mandatory. CJI asked, “What’s wrong with this?” Sibal said that at present, a Waqf can be made by the user without registration.
The CJI said, “You can register the Waqf, which will also help you to maintain the register.” Justice Vishwanathan also said, “If you have a deed then there will be no fake or false claim.” Sibal said, “They will ask us whether a Waqf was created 300 years ago and will ask to present its documents. Many of these assets were made hundreds of years ago and they will not have any documents.”
5- On behalf of the Center, India’s Solicitor General Tushar Mehta emphasized that the law was enacted after a practice by the Joint Parliamentary Committee. He said that both houses of Parliament passed the bill after a long debate. While the debate continued, the CJI pointed to the provision related to disputes with the government and asked why the property should not be considered until the dispute was settled.
The CJI said, “Why will this waqf not live? Let the civil court decide it.” The CJI asked, “Mr. Tushar Mehta, tell us. If the Waqf-Bai-Uzer was accepted before the 2025 Act, is it now declared zero or existential?”
6- The CJI also sought clarity about the conditions that the property should not be disputed. The CJI said, “We did not have any registration before the British arrive. Many mosques are built in the 14th or 15th century. It is impossible to present them to submit the registered documents. In most cases, such as Jama Masjid Delhi, Waqf By user will be Waqf.”
7- The Chief Justice also questioned Mehta about the provision made in Section 2A, which states that despite any decision of the court, the property of the trust will not come under the purview of the Waqf Act. The CJI said, “You cannot declare any decision or order of the Legislative Court zero, you can remove the basis of the law but you cannot declare any decision binding.”
8- CJI Khanna also asked about the provisions allowing for enrollment of non-Muslim members in Waqf boards. The CJI asked, “When we sit here to take a decision, we forget our religion. We are talking about a board that is managing religious matters. Suppose in the Hindu temple, all Hindus in the Governor Council are all Hindus. How are you comparing with judges?”
9- The CJI also expressed concern over the provision of Section 2A. CJI Khanna said, “Where the public trust has been declared a Waqf, suppose 100 or 200 years ago, you turn back and say that it is not a waqf. You cannot write the past 100 years ago!”
10- During the hearing, Tushar Mehta said that a large section of Muslims does not want to be governed by the Waqf Act. On this, the CJI asked whether you are saying that now Muslims will also be included in the Hindu Entry Board? Just say it clearly.
Also read: ‘Apart from ex -officio officials in Waqf Board, Muslim members should be only’, Supreme Court comments