In an interim order, the Supreme Court declined to stay the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, upholding the legislative presumption of constitutionality. However, it partially stayed specific provisions, including the “five-year practice of Islam” requirement and certain clauses related to government property inquiries, deeming them prima facie arbitrary pending a final constitutional validity hearing.
Facts Of The Case:
A batch of writ petitions challenged the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, before the Supreme Court. The petitioners, arguing on behalf of Muslim community interests, contended that the amendments violated fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, and 300A of the Constitution. Key challenges were mounted against provisions that de-recognized “Waqf by User,” mandated a five-year practice of Islam for creating a Waqf, allowed for the exclusion of government properties from Waqf status through a summary inquiry, and altered the composition of Central and State Waqf Boards to include non-Muslim members. The petitioners sought an interim stay on the operation of the entire Act pending a final hearing. The Union of India, represented by the Solicitor General, defended the legislation as a necessary measure to prevent misuse, protect government properties from encroachment, and ensure better management of Waqf affairs. The core issue before the Court was limited to determining whether the petitioners had made out a case for granting interim relief by staying the Act.
Procedural History:
The procedural history of this case originates with the enactment of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. A batch of writ petitions was subsequently filed directly before the Supreme Court under its original jurisdiction, challenging the constitutionality of the new law. During initial hearings, a previous bench recorded assurances from the Solicitor General that no appointments to Waqf Councils or Boards would be made, and no existing Waqf properties would be de-notified, until the next hearing. The matter was then extensively heard by the present bench, led by the Chief Justice, on the specific question of granting interim relief. The Court heard lengthy arguments from multiple senior counsel for the petitioners, the Union of India, and intervening parties, culminating in the present judgment which decides the limited issue of whether to stay the Act’s operation pending a final hearing on its merits.
READ ALSO:No Retrial Merely to Fill Gaps in Prosecution, Rules Supreme Court in Drug Case
Court Observation:
The Supreme Court made several key observations while deciding on the interim relief. It reaffirmed the settled legal principle that there is a strong presumption in favour of the constitutionality of a legislation and that courts must be very slow to grant a stay on an Act of Parliament. The Court conducted a prima facie analysis of the challenged provisions, observing that the requirement to demonstrate five years of practice of Islam for creating a Waqf, while having a rational nexus with the object of preventing misuse, was unworkable without a prescribed mechanism and hence arbitrary in its current form. It also found the procedure under Section 3C for inquiring into government properties to be prima facie arbitrary for allowing a revenue officer to decide title and for altering the property’s status even before the inquiry was complete. However, the Court observed that the deletion of “Waqf by User” was a prospective legislative change to curb encroachment and not manifestly arbitrary, and that provisions protecting tribal lands and ancient monuments had a valid constitutional objective. The Court also noted the Solicitor General’s assurances regarding the limited number of non-Muslim members on Waqf bodies.
Final Decision & Judgement:
The Supreme Court, in its final decision, refused to grant a complete stay on the operation of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. However, it partially stayed specific provisions it found to be prima facie arbitrary. The stayed sections include the requirement for a person to demonstrate five years of practice of Islam to create a Waqf, the proviso and subsequent clauses of Section 3C that allowed a designated officer to alter the status of a property deemed as government land before a judicial determination. The Court also issued directives that the Central Waqf Council and State Boards shall not have more than four and three non-Muslim members respectively, and that efforts should be made to appoint a Muslim Chief Executive Officer. The Court clarified that its observations were interim in nature for the purpose of deciding on the stay and would not prejudice the final hearing on the Act’s constitutional validity.
Case Details:
Case Title: IN RE: THE WAQF AMENDMENT ACT, 2025 (1) Citation: 2025 INSC 1116 Case Number: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 276 of 2025 Date of Judgement:September 15, 2025 Judges/Justice Name: Justice B.R. Gavai & Justice Augustine George Masih
Download The Judgement Here