Should We Entertain Writ Petitions Or Relegate It To HC, SC Asks Waqf (Amendment) Act Challengers

NEW DELHI:
The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the petitioners challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 to explain as to why the top court should entertain the writ petitions filed directly before it and should not relegate the matter to the High Court.

At the very outset, a bench headed by CJI Sanjiv Khanna said: “Two aspects we would like both sides to address. First, whether we should entertain writ petitions or relegate it to the High Court? Second, what do you (petitioners) want to argue?”

The Bench, also comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan, is hearing the arguments being made by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of one of the petitioners.

Multiple petitions have been filed before the top court challenging the constitutional validity of the recent amendments introduced in the Waqf Act, 1995.

In response to the petitions seeking a stay on the implementation of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, the Union government has filed a caveat in the Supreme Court. A caveat serves as a notice submitted to a court by a party to a litigation who wishes to be heard in case any stay order is likely to be issued on the opponent’s plea.

Also, several BJP-ruled states, including Haryana, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Assam and Uttarakhand, have approached the Supreme Court seeking to defend the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.

After the legislation was passed by Parliament in the first week of April, the Congress announced it will challenge the Waqf (Amendment) Bill (now an Act after the Presidential assent) before the Supreme Court, claiming that it was an attack on the basic structure of the Constitution and was aimed at “polarising” and “dividing” the country on the basis of religion. On the other hand, the government has said that crores of poor Muslims will benefit from this legislation, and in no way does it harm any single Muslim. Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju has said the legislation did not interfere with the Waqf properties, adding that the Modi government works with the vision of ‘Sabka Saath and Sabka Vikas’.

In his petition filed before the apex court, Congress MP and party whip in Lok Sabha Mohammad Jawed contended that the amendments violated Articles 14 (right to equality), 25 (freedom to practice and propagate religion), 26 (freedom of religious denominations to manage their religious affairs), 29 (minority rights), and 300A (right to property) of the Constitution.

Another plea filed by All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi said the impugned amendments are “ex facie violative of Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30, 300A of the Constitution of India and manifestly arbitrary”.

Several others, including the Association for Protection of Civil Rights, AAP leader Amanatullah Khan, Maulana Arshad Madani of Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), the Indian Union Muslim League, Taiyyab Khan Salmani, and Anjum Kadari, have filed petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025.

The concept of ‘Waqf’, rooted in Islamic laws and traditions, refers to an endowment made by a Muslim for charitable or religious purposes, such as mosques, schools, hospitals, or other public institutions.