Crime Today News
Two fresh petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court by political parties – the Communist Party of India and the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.
While the first writ petition was moved by Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) President and actor Vijay, the second was filed by CPI General Secretary D Raja.
Moved on April 9 by Advocate Ram Sankar, the writ petition by CPI challenged the constitutional validity of the 2025 Act, as well as the provisions inserted and omitted in the Waqf Act, 1995.
It contended that the Waqf Amendment Act violated the fundamental rights of about 50 lakh Muslims in Tamil Nadu and 20 crore Muslims in other parts of the country.
Earlier on March 27, 2025, the CPI, in alliance with the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), had supported a resolution moved in the State Legislative Assembly by by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin, urging the Centre to withdraw the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025.
The Bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Viswanathan will hear a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the 2025 Act on April 16.
The Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025, which aimed to regulate waqf properties by proposing amendments in the Waqf Act, 1995, came into effect on April 8, following a notification issued by the Ministry of Minority Affairs under Section 1(2) of the Act.
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 was passed by the Lok Sabha on April 3 with 288 Members of Parliament (MPs) voting in favour and 232 against it. The Bill received the Rajya Sabha nod on April 4 after 128 MPs voted in favour and 95 against it.
On April 5, President Draupadi Murmu gave her assent to the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.
Several petitions have been filed in the Apex Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Act.
The Union government also filed a caveat in the Apex Court on April 8, stating that no ex-parte order shall be passed by the Court without hearing the key respondent in the case.
The Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) and the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) filed separate petitions against the Act on April 7, terming it an infringement of minority rights.
On April 6, Samastha Kerala Jem Iyyathul Ulema, a body of Sunni scholars, also approached the top court of the country against the Act, calling it a violation of fundamental rights of the minority community protected under Article 26 of the Constitution.
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA and chairman of the Delhi Waqf Board Amanatullah Khan had filed a similar petition on April 5. Khan submitted that the bill curtailed the religious and cultural autonomy of Muslims, while undermining the minority rights to manage their religious and charitable institutions.
Noting that the Act enabled arbitrary executive interference, Khan sought urgent intervention of the Apex Court to safeguard the secular and constitutional fabric of the country.
On April 4, All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) Member of Parliament Asaduddin Owaisi and Congress party whip in the Lok Sabha Mohammad Jawed moved the Apex Court against the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025.
While Owaisi termed the Bill as unconstitutional, Jawed called it discriminatory towards the Muslim community and violating their fundamental rights.
Jawed contended that the Bill violated Article 14 (right to equality), 25 (freedom to practice religion), 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs), 29 (minority rights) and 300A (right to property) of the Constitution.
The Congress party whip in the Lok Sabha was a member of the Joint Parliamentary Committee that reviewed the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024.
Filed by Advocate Anas Tanwir, Jawed’s petition alleged that the Bill discriminated against the Muslim community by imposing restrictions that were not present in the governance of other religious endowments.
He said while the Hindu and Sikh religious trusts continued to enjoy a degree of self-regulation, the amendments to the Waqf Act, 1995 disproportionately increased state intervention in Waqf affairs.
Such differential treatment amounted to a violation of Article 14 in addition to the introduction of arbitrary classifications that lacked a reasonable nexus to the objectives sought to be achieved, making it impermissible under the doctrine of manifest arbitrariness, he added.
Jawed said the Bill introduces restrictions on the creation of Waqfs based on the duration of one’s religious practice. Such a limitation was unfounded in Islamic law, customs or precedents, and infringed upon the fundamental right to profess and practice religion under Article 25.
The restriction further discriminated against individuals who had recently converted to Islam and wished to dedicate property for religious or charitable purposes, thereby violating Article 15, noted the petition.
The plea contended that the proposed amendment to the composition of the Waqf Board and the Central Waqf Council, mandating the inclusion of non-Muslim members in Waqf administrative bodies, was an unwarranted interference in religious governance, unlike Hindu religious endowments, which remained exclusively managed by Hindus under various state enactments.
The petition submitted that this selective intervention, without imposing similar conditions on other religious institutions, was an arbitrary classification and violated Articles 14 & 15.
Union Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju introduced the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 in the Lok Sabha on August 28, 2024.
Waqf refers to properties dedicated exclusively for religious or charitable purposes under the Islamic law. The Waqf Act, 1995, was enacted to govern the administration of waqf properties (religious endowments) in India.
It provided for the power and functions of the Waqf Council, State Waqf Boards, the Chief Executive Officer, and the mutawalli. The Act further spoke about the power and restrictions of Waqf Tribunals, which act in lieu of a civil court under its jurisdiction.
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, renamed the 1995 Act to the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, reflecting its broader objective to improve the management and efficiency of Waqf boards and properties.
While the 1995 Act allowed waqf to be formed by declaration, long-term use, or endowment, the Waqf Amendment Act 2025 stated that only a person practicing Islam for at least five years may declare a waqf. It clarified that the person must own the property being declared. It removed waqf by user, where properties could be deemed as waqf based solely on prolonged use for religious purposes. It also added that waqf-alal-aulad must not result in the denial of inheritance rights to the donor’s heir, including women heirs.
While the 1995 Act empowered the Waqf Board to inquire and determine if a property is waqf, the 2025 Act removed this provision.
It provided that two members of the Central Waqf Council, set up to advise the Central and State governments and waqf boards, must be non-Muslims. Members of Parliament, former judges, and eminent persons appointed to the Council as per the Act need not be Muslims. Representatives of Muslim organisations, scholars in Islamic law and chairpersons of Waqf Boards must be Muslims. Of the Muslim members, two must be women.
The Act empowered the Central government to make rules regarding the registration and publication of accounts of waqf, along with the publication of proceedings of Waqf Boards.
Under the 2025 Act, state governments could get the accounts of Waqfs audited at any point. It has empowered the Central government to get these audited by the CAG or a designated officer.
The All India Association of Jurists (AIAJ), a community of lawyers, former judges and law enthusiasts, became the first among the legal fraternity, to challenge the 2025 Act before the Apex Court. The plea termed the Act ‘unconstitutional’ and sought the striking down of the law.
Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra also filed a petition challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, alleging that Parliamentary rules and practices were violated during the law-making process, contributing to the unconstitutionality of the 2025 Act.
This was the first petition among the many filed so far against the Waqf Acts, which claimed that the Chairperson of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) flouted the parliamentary rules and practices, both at the stage of consideration and adoption of the draft report of JPC on the Bill, and at the stage of presentation of the said report before the Parliament.
The Hindu Sena became the first petitioner to move the Apex Court supporting the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025. It said in its plea that the Act amended the ‘draconian’ nature of earlier provisions provided in the 1995 Act.
📰 Crime Today News is proudly sponsored by DRYFRUIT & CO – A Brand by eFabby Global LLC
Design & Developed by Yes Mom Hosting
