Supreme Court Stays Key Provisions of Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025

Why in the News?

1. The Supreme Court of India passed an interim order staying some provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, while refusing to block the entire law.
2. Nearly 65 petitions challenged the Act, claiming it violated the constitutional rights of religious denominations.
3. The order, by a Bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih, marks a crucial stage in the debate over religious autonomy and state regulation.

Key Highlights

1. What is Waqf?
   1. Meaning: In Islamic law, a Waqf is a permanent dedication of property (movable or immovable) for religious or charitable purposes.
   2. Management: Such properties are managed by Waqf Boards under the Waqf Act, 1995.
   3. Importance: They support mosques, madrasas, charitable institutions, and welfare activities in the community.
2. What Changes Did the 2025 Amendment Introduce?
   1. Abolition of “Waqf by Use”: Long-term use for religious purposes could no longer create Waqf unless supported by a written deed.
   2. New Powers to Collectors: Section 3C allowed a Collector-rank officer to decide if Waqf land was actually government property and make direct changes to records.
   3. Inclusion of Non-Muslims: Non-Muslims could become members of Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council, potentially creating non-Muslim majorities.
   4. Five-Year Rule: Only those practising Islam for at least five years could dedicate property as Waqf.
   5. Applicability of Limitation Act: Waqf Boards now had to reclaim encroached land within time limits, ending their exemption.
3. Why Was the Amendment Challenged?
   1. Violation of Article 26: Petitioners argued that the law interfered with the community’s right to manage its religious and charitable institutions.
   2. Collector’s Powers = Executive Overreach: Deciding property ownership was a judicial function, not an administrative one.
   3. Non-Muslim Members: The possibility of non-Muslim majorities on Waqf boards was seen as direct interference in self-governance.
   4. Abolition of Waqf by Use: Critics feared historic religious properties without deeds could lose their Waqf status.
   5. Five-Year Rule: Seen as arbitrary and discriminatory, with no clear method to verify religious practice.
4. What Provisions Did the SC Stay?
   1. Collector’s Powers (Section 3C): Suspended because suspending Waqf status merely on inquiry was arbitrary. Revenue officers cannot act like courts.
   2. Non-Muslim Representation: SC capped the numbers to prevent non-Muslim majorities (4/22 at the Central level, 3/11 at the State level).
   3. Five-Year Rule: Suspended as impractical, since there was no system to prove or verify continuous religious practice.
5. What Provisions Did the SC Not Stay?
   1. Abolition of “Waqf by Use”
      1. Earlier, a property could become Waqf if it was used continuously for religious or charitable purposes, even if no written deed existed.
      2. The 2025 amendment abolished this practice, saying that in future only a written deed can create Waqf.

• Many petitions asked the Court to stop this, fearing old mosques, graveyards, and religious sites without formal deeds would lose recognition.

1. But the Supreme Court refused to stay it. It is because the law only applies prospectively (for the future). Old Waqfs are unaffected, only new dedications must have deeds. So, the Court said it is not arbitrary.

1. Application of the Limitation Act to Waqf properties
   1. Earlier, Waqf Boards could reclaim encroached land at any time, even after 50 or 100 years, since they were exempt from the Limitation Act.
   2. The amendment removed this exemption, meaning Waqf Boards must now file recovery cases within the same time limits as everyone else (e.g., 12 years for immovable property).

• Petitioners argued this was unfair and weakened Waqf protection.

1. But the Supreme Court disagreed, noting that this actually removes discrimination; it puts Waqf properties on the same legal footing as other properties, which is more in line with equality before law.

Implications

1. For Religious Freedom
   26. The SC’s interim relief protects minority autonomy in managing institutions under Article 26.
   27. However, abolition of Waqf by use could shrink the scope of traditional community rights.
2. For Land Governance
   1. The amendment strengthens protection against false Waqf claims, aiding government land records.
   2. Yet, genuine community-held lands without deeds may face legal uncertainty.
3. For Judiciary vs Executive
   1. SC reinforced the principle that land title disputes belong to courts, not bureaucrats.
   2. This ruling strengthens judicial review in property and religious matters.
4. For Social and Political Dynamics
   1. Allowing non-Muslim members but capping their numbers reflects a compromise between inclusion and autonomy.
   2. The debate may fuel political tensions over secularism and minority rights.
5. For India’s Legal-Religious Framework
   1. The judgment sets a precedent for balancing reforms with constitutional safeguards.
   2. It will guide future reforms in managing religious endowments like temples, mathas, and gurdwaras.

Challenges and Way Forward

Conclusion

The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, reflects the government’s attempt to reform religious endowment management, but its provisions triggered concerns over religious freedom, executive overreach, and minority rights. The Supreme Court’s interim stay protects core constitutional values while allowing certain reforms. The final judgment will decide how India balances secular governance with religious autonomy.