The Hindu: Published on 17th April 2025:
Why in News?
The Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, on April 17, 2025, raised critical concerns over the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, especially on:
Denotification of Waqf-by-user properties
Inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf boards
The State's authority to determine Waqf status of properties
The Court heard around 100 petitions challenging the Act, signaling strong constitutional and religious implications.
Background-
The Waqf Act governs religious endowments made by Muslims.
"Waqf-by-user" refers to properties considered Waqf through long religious use, even if not formally registered.
The 2025 Amendment Act removed legal recognition for such properties and introduced new administrative and eligibility norms.
Supreme Court Observations-
Proposed 3-Point Interim Balance by CJI Khanna:
- Protection from Denotification
- Properties already declared Waqf (especially by usage) should not be treated as non-Waqf for now.
- Stay on Freeze Clause
- Government officers can still examine ownership status, but stay the freezing clause that bars usage as Waqf during examination.
- Conditional Inclusion of Non-Muslims
- Appointment of non-Muslims as ex-officio members on Waqf Boards may be allowed, if majority members remain Muslims.
- However, no interim order was passed, as the Union Government sought more time.
Constitutional Questions Raised-
Article 26 Violation?
Requiring proof of being a practising Muslim for 5 years to dedicate a property as Waqf was alleged to violate the right to manage religious affairs.
Religious Autonomy vs State Control
Petitioners argued that Waqf is intrinsic to Islamic practice, and State overreach into its governance undermines religious freedom.
Administrative Inclusion Controversy
The idea of non-Muslims governing Muslim religious endowments raised questions about parity with Hindu religious board practices.
Key Arguments-
Kapil Sibal (Petitioner side):
Asking for proof of 5 years of religious practice to dedicate property is like “proving I’m a good Muslim to the State”.
Rajeev Dhavan:
Waqf is a core religious act in Islam; the Act transfers religious control to the State, violating secular norms.
Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta (Government):
Argued that Waqf-by-user properties can be registered; charity is still possible outside Waqf framework.
Concerns Expressed by the Court-
Historical Context:
CJI Khanna noted that many Waqfs (e.g., Jama Masjid) were formed before land registration laws existed, making it impossible to produce documents now.
Communal Tensions:
The CJI termed the recent West Bengal violence over the Waqf Act as “very disturbing”.
Legal Consistency:
Whether previously accepted legal concepts like Waqf-by-user can be invalidated retroactively was questioned.
What Next?
The case was adjourned to the next day (April 18, 2025) for further hearings.
No interim order has yet been passed, but the Supreme Court appears inclined to protect religious rights while reviewing legislative validity.
Implications-
- The case may become a landmark ruling on religious autonomy, secular governance, and legal status of undocumented historical religious properties.
- It also tests the limits of State intervention in religious affairs in a secular democracy.
