The Supreme Court will order on Monday (September 15, 2025) on the Waqf Amendment Act case. The court reserved the order on 22 May on the issue of interim relief in the case. The bench of Chief Justice BR Gawai and Augustin George Christ heard for 3 consecutive days.

During the hearing, the court had told the petitioners that the law made from Parliament is considered constitutional till the final decision is taken. A very strong base will be required to stop its provisions.

Opposition to things like preventing Waqf Board from claiming

The petitioner side has opposed things such as making the registration of Waqf by user mandatory, in the dispute of the Waqf Board with the government, to be in the hands of a government official, to make non -Muslims members members in the Waqf Board, the possibility of religious activity in ancient monuments, the condition of being a Muslim for 5 years and the Waqf Board on the tribal land to stop the Waqf Board. They have been described as discrimination from Muslims and interference in religious matters.

On the other hand, the Central Government cited the law to enact a law after following the entire process on behalf of Parliament. The Center said that it would not be right to stop the sections of the law before the final hearing. Those who have brought the petition here are not personally affected. He is not a representative of the entire Muslim community. The law has been made in public interest. The discrepancies of the old Waqf law have been removed.

This condition placed for waqf

The government said that Waqf is not an essential part of Islam. It cannot be given the status like fundamental rights. The registration of Waqf by user was also kept necessary in the 1923 law. People who have not registered for 102 years, are still protesting. If the property is not their, then it should be used in social interest.

The Center also argued that earlier only Muslims could do Waqf, but in 2013, the provision of the property of non -Muslims was also made. To improve this, a condition has been laid for at least 5 years to be a Muslim. Constitution also gives protection to the land of tribals.

Indication of prohibiting law provisions

Limited members in the Waqf Board will be non -Muslims, whose role will also be very limited. There will be no difference from new Waqf law on religious activities in ancient monuments. It should be noted that during the initial hearing of the case, the bench headed by the then Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna had indicated to stop some provisions of the law, but on April 17, the central government itself assured the court that there would be no appointment in the Waqf Board or Waqf Council at present.

Also, registered or declared Waqf by user (Waqf) properties will not be denotified. Now the order of the court will decide whether the Waqf Amendment Act will be fully applicable or not.

Also read:- Employee provoked with being fired from job in Hyderabad

In the petitions filed against the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, the law has been described as a violation of Article 25 of the Constitution. Article 25 gives the right to guarantee the freedom of religion. The Center has given a strong reply to this plea of ​​the petitioners. On behalf of the Center, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said in the Supreme Court that Hindu code bill was brought and the rights of Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and Buddhist community were taken away, then no one said why Muslims were released.

A bench of Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gawai and Justice Augustine George Christ reserved the verdict on Thursday (May 22, 2025) after three days of hearing. In the first day’s hearing, the petitioners made their arguments, while on May 21 and 22, the lawyers appearing for the Center and other states presented their stand in defense of the law.

On behalf of the Center, SG Tushar Mehta said that the new Waqf law is not contrary to Article 25 of the Constitution. He mentioned the Hindu Code Bill, which was brought to codes the rights of Hindus. He said, ‘When the Hindu Code Bill was introduced in the year 1956, their personal law rights were taken away from Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jainism. Then no one said why Muslims were released and not others?

The purpose of the Hindu Code Bill was to create a codes and modern Hindu personal laws in a general civil code. This included women rights in property, equal divorce rights and other provisions on subjects like marriage, divorce, succession and adoption.

SG Tushar Mehta gave the example of the Tamil Nadu Endowment Act on the issue of the inclusion of non-Muslims in the Waqf Board, which allows the removal of the monastery on violation of rules. He said that and we are arguing here that Articles 25 and 26 will be violated by the inclusion of non-Muslims.

Tushar Mehta, stating the difference between Hindu settlement and waqf, said that Hindu settlement is only religious work. They do religious work, but the Waqf also includes secular institutions like schools, madrasa, orphanages and dharamshalas. Referring to the Bombay Public Trust Act, he said that it controls the temples of Maharashtra and there is a arrangement that the chairman can be from any religion, whereas it is not in Waqf.

SG Tushar Mehta said that Waqf consists of two officers, one Sajjadanshin, who is a spiritual head and sees the functioning related to religion. The second is, Mutavalli, who is an administrator or manager. He said that Sajjadanshin is not a subject in the Waqf Amendment Act, because this law has nothing to do with spiritual or religious functioning.

After the approval of President Draupadi Murmu on April 5, 2025, the Waqf Amendment Act came into force in the country, but many petitioners reached the Supreme Court demanding an interim ban on it. In the first hearing on 16 April, the bench of former Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna heard 72 petitions and banned the new appointment in the board till the next hearing. At the same time, the status quo was also asked to maintain the status quo on the declared property declared.

Justice Sanjeev Khanna had transferred the case to the bench of the new CJI BR Gawai before his retirement. From 20 May to 22 May, the bench of CJI Gawai heard the Waqf law case for three days.

Also read:-
Shri Banke Bihari Temple Corridor of Rs 500 crore, who is forming UP government, reached the Supreme Court to protest, Devendra Nath Goswami, said to CJI Gawai- I am a descendant …

The Supreme Court Justice Augustin George Christ has made a very important remarks on the petitions filed against the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025 on Thursday (May 22, 2025). Justice Christ said that Islam will remain Islam anywhere. The judge said this on the argument of the Center, stating that the Scheduled Tribe Muslim community living in the tribal area does not follow Islam as it is done in the rest of the country.

According to the report of the Bar and Bench, the bench of Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai and Justice Augustin George Christ has been hearing the Waqf Act case for three consecutive days. In the third day hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that under the new law, it is right to give protection to the lands of the Muslim community of Scheduled Tribes. He said that Scheduled Class people living in the tribal area have constitutional protection, which they have received due to valid reasons.

Center arguments over ST class Muslims
SG Tushar Mehta said, ‘Waqf means permanent dedication for God. Suppose I sold my land and found that the person of the Scheduled Tribe has been cheated, then the land can be refunded in this case, but the Waqf is irreversible. He said that the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) says that Muslims living in these tribal areas do not follow Islam like Muslims living in the rest of the country, they have their own cultural identity.

Justice Christ’s important comment on Islam
On this argument of SG Tushar Mehta, Justice AG Christ said, ‘Islam will remain Islam. Religion is the same anywhere. There may be a difference in cultural practices of those living in different parts. SG Mehta said, ‘I am just asking if it can be a basis for stopping the law?’

‘Land being grabbed in the name of Waqf’, said Tushar Mehta
The Solicitor General told the court that the tribal organizations have argued that they are being tortured and their land is being grabbed in the name of Waqf, is it not completely unconstitutional.

From Tuesday, the bench of the new CJI BR Gawai started hearing on the petitions filed to challenge the Waqf Amendment Act. Earlier, former Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna was looking into the matter, but before retirement, he had transferred the case to the bench of Justice BR Gawai.

Also read:-
‘ED is breaking all limits …’, Know- In which case the Supreme Court made this comment

During the hearing in the Supreme Court on Wednesday (May 21, 2025) on the petitions filed against the Waqf Amendment Act, the Center said that no petitioner is personally affected by the law. He said that only some people cannot become representatives of the entire Muslim community by filing a petition. He cannot say that the whole Muslim community also thinks the things they have problems.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared on behalf of the Center. He said that the Parliament enacted a law and made suggestions of millions of people before making laws. SG Mehta said that some people cannot call themselves representatives of the entire Muslim community and the Waqf law had been decreasing since 1923, which has been repaired.

The case was also heard on Tuesday, in which senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Rajiv Dhawan argued on behalf of the petitioners. Today, SG Tushar Mehta, while favoring the Center, said that from 1923 to 1995 law was the law that only Muslims could have walked, but before the elections in 2013, the law was made that anyone could do waqf. He said that the government has improved it and a condition has been placed to follow Islam for at least 5 years to wake up.

SG Tushar Mehta said, ‘If someone is using some place, he does not have paper in that place and claims that it is an unregistered Waqf by user. If the property is government in the government’s records, will it not be investigated? The petitioners had objected to the registration of the property in the hearing yesterday and said that where will the 100-200 year old Waqf papers come from,

On the plea of ​​SG Tushar Mehta, Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai said that but the petitioners say that the government itself will investigate its claim. Tushar Mehta said, ‘Revenue officials will investigate the land revenue records. He will not decide any final ownership. The affected side has a way to go to court.

SG Mehta said that people had problems with the investigation of the collector, then another officer was decided. He will only amend the revenue record and amend. The CJI asked the SG that there would be an entry on paper only. Tushar Mehta said on the question of CJI Gavai, “Yes, if the government wants ownership, it will also file a civil case.”

The petitioners also had an objection to whether anyone could object to the property and then whether the property belongs to the government, it will also be decided by the government of the government. He said that as soon as the dispute on property starts, she will go to the government i.e. Waqf will not remain and if the board goes to court, then the property will remain the property of the government until the court comes to court.

West bengal CM mamata bnerjee: Many other areas including Murshidabad in West Bengal have seen a lot of violence in the past. Now West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has appealed to people for peace. The Chief Minister released an official statement on Saturday (April 19, 2025). He appealed to improve the situation in the state and maintain law and order. Apart from this, he has held BJP and RSS responsible for inciting violence in the state in his statement.

Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said, “BJP and its allies have suddenly become very aggressive in West Bengal. These allies also include the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). I did not name the RSS earlier, but now I am forced to identify them.” He said, “These forces are using the background of an unfortunate event as provocation. They are using this background for divisive politics. They want to play the game of ‘divide and rule’. In such a situation, I appeal to you, please be calm.”

We are taking action on the criminal behind riots – Chief Minister

Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said, “We condemn communal riots and it is necessary to stop them. Strict action is being taken against those who are behind the riots, but we should avoid mutual mistrust and doubts. Major and minority communities should take care of each other.”

West Bengal CM Mamata Bnerjee appeals for peace in the state.

She says, “BJP and Its allies have suddenly become aligned in west Bengal. These allies include RSS … these forces are using the backdrop of an unfortunate if Are… pic.twitter.com/zcz77v1v11

– ANI (@ani) April 19, 2025

CM accused BJP and RSS

The Chief Minister accused the BJP and the RSS, saying, “They want to incite riots in the state and the riots affect everyone. We love everyone. We want to be together. We condemn the riots. We are against the riots. They want to divide us, only for tight electoral benefits. We have taken strict steps to maintain law and order and protect human life and dignity. Further action is being taken. “

Waqf amendment act: On Thursday (April 17, 2025) in the Supreme Court, the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf Amendment Act 2025 were heard for the second consecutive day. The court has given the central government a time limit of 7 days to file a reply and said that during this time there will be no new appointment or Waqf properties.

On the court hearing, the first response has come from AIMIM Chief and MP from Hyderabad, Asaduddin Owaisi. He said, “We consider the Waqf Amendment Act to be completely unconstitutional. The Supreme Court says that the ‘Waqf by user’ cannot be removed and will not be new appointments, it is a matter of relief for us.”

Asaduddin Owaisi’s response
Asaduddin Owaisi also told that he himself has filed a petition against this act and this legal battle will continue. Owaisi openly opposed this act in Parliament and in JPC (Joint Parliamentary Committee).

‘Violation of Articles of the Constitution’
Owaisi described the Waqf Amendment Act 2025 as a violation of Articles 14, 15, 25 and 26 of the Constitution. He said, “The Constitution empowers all citizens to equality, religious freedom and their religious institutions. This law is against these fundamental rights.”

More than 73 petitions in court regarding Waqf
So far more than 73 petitions have been filed against this act in the Supreme Court. The court has decided that the next hearing, which will be held on 5 May 2025, will have a primary hearing on only 5 petitions. The rest of the petitions will be under consideration in the form of application.

Explain that on behalf of the Central Government, the Solicitor General assured the court that no Waqf will be denotified till the answer is filed nor will any collector be replaced. The Supreme Court also said that the situation which was earlier will remain.

Also read: ‘Even in the case of Babri Masjid …’, What did Maulana Arshad Madani say on the decision of the Supreme Court?

Supreme Court Judgement on New Waqf Act: The Supreme Court proposed to stop some of the major provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in an important development on Wednesday (16 April), including the power to involve non-obtained assets declared by the courts and to include non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Councils and Board.

The apex court proposed to pass the order, which the Center opposed and appealed for a detailed hearing before any interim order. The hearing related to 72 petitions against the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 was held before the bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Vishwanathan.

Supreme Court asked questions from Soleitor General

The court bench will continue the hearing on Thursday (April 17). It expressed displeasure over the inclusion of non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Councils and Board and asked the Center if he was ready to include Muslims in Hindu religious trusts? After hearing the arguments of senior advocates including Kapil Sibal, Rajiv Dhawan, Abhishek Singhvi, CU Singh on behalf of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Muslim bodies and individual petitioners, the Chief Justice proposed to issue notice and pass an interim order and said that it will balance the equality.

It is mentioned that some provisions can have serious consequences, especially those who can weaken judicially recognized Waqf properties, the Chief Justice proposed the order. The bench said, “The properties declared as Waqf on behalf of the courts should not be non-defined as Waqf, whether they are Waqf on behalf of the user or Waqf on the deed, although the court is hearing a petition challenging the Waqf Amendment Act 2025.”

Indications to stop a provision of revised law

The bench also indicated to stop a provision of the revised law, stating that the vaqf property will not be considered as a waqf until the property is government land or not by the Collector. The bench looked at the provision-wise objections regarding the Act and expressed objections on several aspects of the law, including including non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf boards. In this, the District Collector also objected to the provisions allowing the right to settle disputes related to Waqf properties and to allow non-deferred assets to be declared by competent courts.

Speech on petitions filed against Waqf Amendment Act CJI

CJI Sanjeev Khanna said, “Usually, when a law is passed, courts do not interfere at the entry level, but the case may require exception. If the property declared by the user is unacceptable, it can have serious consequences.”

A sharp debate between back and Solicitor General

During the hearing, there was a sharp noise between the bench and the Solicitor General when the judges questioned the argument behind the permission of non-Muslims in the Waqf administration, while Hindu religious institutions do not apply equal mutuality.

The Law Officer said that in addition to ex-officio members in the Waqf Parishad, more than two non-Muslim members will not be included. He offered to say this in an affidavit. However, the bench said that out of 22 members of the Central Waqf Parishad under the new Act, only eight would be Muslims. The bench asked, “If there are eight Muslims, then there can be two judges who are not Muslims. This leads to a majority of non-Muslims. How is it compatible with the religious character of the institution?”

Questions raised on the fairness of a bench with Hindu judges

After this, the tension increased for some time when the Law Officer questioned the fairness of the bench with all Hindu judges. The bench said, “When we sit here, we give up our personal identity. For us, all sides are the same before the law. This comparison is completely wrong.” He asked why non-Hindus should not be included in the advisory board of Hindu temples again?

Court has not issued any formal notice yet

The court has not currently issued any formal notice and said that it will not consider banning the law in the current stage. The bench questioned Mehta as to how the “Waqf from the user” cannot be allowed, as many people would not have the required documents to register such Waqf. “Waqf” means “the user” is a practice in which a property in the form of religious or charitable settlement (Waqf) is given on the basis of long -term, uninterrupted use for its purposes, even if no formal, written announcement of Waqf has been made by the owner.

The amended provision said, “provided that the existing Waqf properties will remain in the form of Waqf property on the day of or before the implementation of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, except that the property is completely or partially in dispute or government property.”

The bench said, “How will you register such a user’s Waqf?” What documents will they have? This will make something undone. Yes, there is some misuse. But they are also real. I have also read the decisions of the Privy Council. The user’s Waqf is recognized. If you undo it, it will be a problem. The legislature cannot declare any decision, order or decree zero. You can only take Aadhaar. ”

Mehta, however, said that a large section of Muslims does not want to be ruled under the Waqf Act. The bench then asked Mehta, “Are you saying that from now on, you will allow Muslims to be a part of the Hindu Entrance Board?” Say it openly. ”

The Supreme Court said that when a public trust was declared a Waqf 100 or 200 years ago, it could not be taken under the Waqf Board and could not be declared otherwise. The bench said, “You cannot write the past again.” To this Mehta said that the Joint Parliamentary Committee held 38 meetings and investigated 98.2 lakh memorandum before its passage from both houses of Parliament.

CJI said at the beginning of the hearing, “There are two aspects on which we want to talk to both sides.” First of all, should we consider it or be handed over to the High Court? Second, briefly explain what you are really insisting and what you want to argue? We are not saying that there is any stay on the Supreme Court in hearing the petitions against the law and taking decisions.

Kapil Sibal said during the hearing

On behalf of the petitioners, senior advocate Kapil Sibal cited the Waqf Amendment Act and said that he is challenging the provision that only Muslims can wow. Sibal asked, “How can the government decide whether I am a Muslim or not and hence I am eligible to wake up?”

He said, “How can the government say that only those people who have been following Islam for the last five years?”

Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, who represents some petitioners, said that the effect of the Waqf Act will be across India and the petitions should not be sent to the High Court. At the same time, opposing the Waqf Act, senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi said that Waqf on behalf of the user is an established practice of Islam and it cannot be taken away.

72 petitions including AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), Congress MPs Imran Pratapgarhi and Mohammad Javed have been filed to challenge the validity of the Act.

Center filed a cavity

On April 8, the Center filed a ‘cavity’ in the Supreme Court and appealed for a hearing before passing any order in the case. To ensure that no order is passed by any party to ensure that no order is passed without hearing its side.

Amanatullah Khan on Waqf Act: Aam Aadmi Party MLA Amanatullah Khan has reacted to hearing in the Supreme Court on petitions against the Waqf Act. He has hoped to get relief from the Supreme Court in the case. At the same time, he also expressed confidence that the Waqf Amendment Bill that has been brought will be stopped today.

‘AAP’ MLA Amanatullah Khan said, “We are hopeful from the Supreme Court that there will be relief in this. We all have come to prepare well. There are many petitions. Keeping all the grounds in mind, we have come for the way the government wants to capture the lands of Waqf. Today there is every hope from the Supreme Court. The eyes of the entire country are also on the Supreme Court and we are confident.

Delhi: on the Supreme Court Hearing Please Against The Waqf Amendment Act, Aap MLA Amanatullah Khan Says, “We have full hope from the Supreme Court that we will get that we will get Bill that has been brought will be styed today. pic.twitter.com/yhkimslkdh

– IANS (@ians_india) April 16, 2025

Government’s purpose to capture Waqf lands- Amanatullah

He further said, “Home Minister Saheb himself has said that the 123 properties in Delhi are at prime location, so what is his purpose. It is their purpose to capture the land and there is no purpose. It is their aim to capture the lands of prime location and Waqf only and only.

‘Waqf Act is not justified from anywhere’

Accusing the government, Amanatullah Khan also said, “Their aim is to get it to be dismantled in every village and entire city. The way these laws have brought, it is not justified from anywhere. There are 1977 properties inside Delhi, I got 298 properties made and the rest of these people did not let me do it. All the agencies fell behind. ”

Several petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the recently made amendments in the Waqf Act, 1995 have been filed in the Supreme Court. In response to the petitions seeking a ban on the implementation of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, the Central Government has filed a cavity in the Supreme Court.

Tribal Organizations on Waqf Amendment Act: Prior to the hearing of the Waqf Amendment case in the Supreme Court, continuous applications are being filed in support of the new law. Now tribal organizations have also demanded that this law be protected by the tribals and demanded to be selected in the Supreme Court. Jai Omkar Bhilala Samaj Sangathan and Adivasi Seva Mandal institutions have filed these new applications.

Section 3E of the new Waqf Amendment Act prohibits the declaration of the land of the Scheduled Tribes people as the property of Waqf. Tribal organizations are considering it an important provision to protect the interests of their community. He says that the constitution makers were particularly concerned about the lands of tribals. As a result, such laws of all the states which ban non-tribal lands of Scheduled Tribes people.

Was being felt for a long time

Tribal organizations have said that the Waqf Act, 1995 was given uncontrolled power to the Waqf Board. There are many examples where the Waqf Board captured the tribals’ land as Waqf. The new Waqf Amendment Act made from Parliament shows the commitment of the Central Government towards the interests of tribal society. The need for such laws was being felt for a long time.

More than 20 petitions filed against the new Waqf law

It is worth mentioning that in addition to leaders of political parties like Congress, RJD, SP, TMC, DMK, AIMIM, many organizations and people have filed petitions in addition to leaders of political parties like Congress, RJD, SP, TMC, DMK, AIMIM, Arshad Madani, President of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind. He has described the new law as discriminating against Muslims. More than 20 such petitions have been filed.

CJI Hearing on bench petitions headed by

On 16 April, the bench of 3 judges headed by Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna will listen to the case. Before that, the petitions continue to be filed in support of the new law. Apart from 2 tribal organizations, 7 state governments have described the new law as constitutional and justified. Apart from this, many persons and organizations have filed applications by stating the new law correct. In this way, 14-15 applications have also been filed in favor of the law. The central government has also filed a cavity and demanded to present its case.

Imran masood on waqf act: Congress MP Imran Masood’s statement about the Waqf law has created a new stir in the political corridors. In a program of All India Muslim Miles Council held in Hyderabad, Masood said that if his party comes to power, the change in the Waqf law will be “in an hour”. BJP spokesperson Yasir Jilani has reacted sharply to his statement and called it fatal for the social harmony of the country.

Imran Masood said in his address, “Where will the mosques not be saved, where will you read the Namaz? Where will the burial do?

Masood further said, “At this time there is a storm in the sea and the storm competes with big kashtis, not small boats. He appealed to the Muslim community to unite and be ready for a big fight.”

On Imran Masood’s statement BJP Spokesperson retaliated

BJP spokesperson Yasir Jilani retaliated on the statement of Congress MP Imran Masood. He said, “Criminal thinking leaders like Imran Masood are a threat to the peace and brotherhood of the country.” Jilani alleged that Masood has also made inflammatory rhetoric from Akbaruddin Owaisi.

He said, “Leaders like Imran Masood are trying to mislead poor Muslims. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government is deprived and exploited by the steps taken on Waqf properties. The deprived and exploited Muslims are happy. As it was earlier, it will be clear by senior leaders of the government.”

BJP The spokesperson did to the people Fir Appeal to do

Jilani also reminded that the Congress had taken away the rights of Muslims even in the Shah Bano case earlier. Taking a dig at Imran Masood, he said that the leaders who win elections in Tukke themselves are now trying to throw poor Muslims in the fire of movement.

The BJP spokesperson appealed to the Muslims, saying, “FIR should be lodged against Imran Masood in every city and every district. Those who want to incite a riot in the name of Waqf Amendment Act should face the law.”

Yasir Jilani further said that last time also when there were agitations against CAA and NRC, cases were filed against poor Muslims by coming under the pretext of such leaders. Now is the time that Muslim society should become aware and take legal action against inflammatory leaders.