Will Supreme Court’s First Post-Vacation Verdict Be on the Controversial Waqf Amendment Act?

Source: Law Joirnal

New Delhi, July 13, 2025 — On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court of India reserved its order on one of the most debated cases of the year: the Waqf Amendment Act 2025. As the Court went on its annual summer vacation shortly thereafter, intense discussions continued across political and legal circles. Now, with the Court set to resume full operations from July 14, anticipation is building around whether the very first major verdict post-reopening will address this highly controversial legislation.

Background and Legal Timeline

The Act, which aims to bring sweeping changes to the governance and administration of Waqf properties across India, has faced intense criticism from multiple quarters, particularly from minority rights groups and opposition parties. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and several individual petitioners have filed challenges, arguing that key provisions of the amended Act violate fundamental rights under Article 26 of the Constitution, which grants religious denominations the autonomy to manage their religious affairs.

Since May 22, while the Supreme Court has held its verdict in reserve, the Union Government has moved forward with a series of administrative actions under the new Act — including launching a new Unified Waqf Portal and notifying the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development Rules, 2025. These moves, critics argue, reflect an overreach, especially as the constitutional validity of the law remains sub judice.

The Central Questions Before the Court

At the heart of the legal challenge lies a fundamental theological and constitutional question:
Is Waqf an essential religious practice in Islam or merely a charitable institution?

• Representing the petitioners, senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that Waqf is a sacred religious obligation — a form of dedication to Allah, intended for the afterlife. "Unlike in other religions, Waqf is not just charity; it is a religious duty performed in devotion to God," he stated.

• On the other side, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union Government, countered that while Waqf is undoubtedly rooted in Islamic tradition, it does not qualify as an essential religious practice under constitutional jurisprudence. Hence, it does not fall within the protection of Articles 25 and 26.

The Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud (as per available seating rosters, though the user mentioned B.R. Gavai leading the bench) and Justices Augustine George Masih and others made significant observations. CJI noted that charity is a fundamental concept across religions, including moksha in Hinduism and heaven in Christianity — suggesting that the issue could not be treated solely through a religious lens.

Controversial Provisions Under Scrutiny

Some of the most debated provisions include:

• Mandatory inclusion of non-Muslim members on Waqf Boards:
  The Government defends this move on the grounds that Waqf Boards mostly perform secular duties such as property management. Petitioners argue that allowing non-Muslims decision-making power in what they call an "Islamic endowment" is a violation of religious autonomy. Kapil Sibal warned, "Muslims will become minorities on panels meant to govern aspects of their faith."

• Restriction on who can donate Waqf property:
  According to the new rules, only Muslims who have "practiced Islam for the last five years" are allowed to make a Waqf declaration. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi lambasted this clause, calling it “deeply intrusive” and a violation of religious freedom, asking: "Which religion asks for proof of faith before charity?"

• The ‘Waqf by User’ clause:
  Previously, the Waqf Board could declare any property being used for religious or charitable purposes as Waqf land — even without documentation. While the government has now removed this clause citing misuse, petitioners presented cases, such as a Tamil Nadu village, where an entire locality including a Chola-era Hindu temple was allegedly declared Waqf land without consent or records.

Interim Relief: To Stay or Not to Stay

When petitioners demanded an interim stay on the implementation of the amended Act until the final verdict, the Centre strongly objected. The government cited the presumption of constitutionality attached to all Parliamentary laws and warned that staying a statute — even indirectly — would violate the principle of separation of powers.

In response, the Supreme Court on May 22 reserved its decision on the interim relief, stating that it would deliberate and deliver an order post-summer break.

Why This Case Matters

The Waqf Amendment Act 2025 is not just a matter of Muslim personal law. It has now become a test case for the robustness of India's secular framework, religious autonomy, property rights, and the limits of state control over religious institutions. With the inclusion of non-Muslims in religious boards, conditions on religious donations, and administrative overhauls being pushed while the Court deliberates, the issue has raised alarms among rights activists, religious bodies, and legal experts.

What to Expect When the Court Reopens

Legal observers believe that the Supreme Court may take up this matter as one of its first high-profile hearings upon reopening on July 14. A verdict granting interim relief would send a strong signal that parts of the Act may be constitutionally flawed, whereas a refusal to stay the provisions would likely be seen as a reinforcement of Parliament's legislative supremacy until a final ruling is made.

As India watches with bated breath, the Waqf Amendment Act case is set to become a landmark legal and societal moment. The decision will likely define the future contours of religious rights, state oversight, and constitutional interpretation in a secular democracy.

Stay tuned for comprehensive updates from Right to Justice, your trusted source for in-depth legal reporting. 

This isn’t just a legal battle — it’s a fight over identity, autonomy, and the soul of India’s Constitution.