NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on April 16 started hearing the arguments on a batch of pleas challenging the Waqf Amendment Act. A three-judge bench of the top court, led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justices P V Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan are hearing the pleas.
During the course of the hearing, the Supreme Court said that it had two questions -- first, should it hear the case or relegate it to the High Court (concerned) and second, what are the points counsel intends to argue in the batch of petitions challenging the Waqf Amendment Act.
The apex court asked, "What were the briefs you all (lawyers and or petitioner) wanted to argue about?"
"We do not want any repetition of arguments by anyone challenging the Waqf Amendment Act," it said.
Kapil Sibal, lawyer for one of the petitioners, started the argument and submitted that the Parliamentary legislation (Waqf Act, 2025) interferes with the essential and integral part of the Constitution, referring to Article 26 of the Constitution.
He said that subject to public order, morality and health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes.
Thereby, every religious faith shall manage its own affairs and the matters related to owning and acquiring movable and immovable property.
"Who is the State to tell us how inheritance will happen in the religion?" Sibal argued.
The petitioners who have moved the SC are: Asaduddin Owaisi, Amanatullah Khan, Association for the Protection of Civil Rights (APCR), Maulana Arshad Madani, Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema, Anjum Kadri and many others.
The petitioners claimed that the amendments will distort the religious character of Waqfs, and also 'irreversibly' damage the democratic process that governs the administration of Waqfs and Waqf boards.
In the same case, the Centre also filed a caveat in the top court. A caveat is a legal document that a party files in a court of law to ascertain and ensure that the court should not pass any order before hearing the side of the caveator.
All the petitioners sought directions from the Supreme Court for a stay on the Act, besides seeking other prayers.
One of the petitioners, Maulana Arshad Madani, the President of the Islamic cleric's body Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, in his plea, said the amendments to the (Wakf) Act were destructive of Wakf administration and jurisprudence in India.
He also stated that it was also an effort to redefine the very nature of Waqfs existing in the country.
The batch of pleas challenged the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 (Act) on the grounds that it violates the rights enshrined under Article 14 (Right to equality), 25 (Freedom to practice religion), 26 (Freedom to manage religious affairs), 29 (Minority rights) and 300-A (Right to property) of the Constitution.
All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) Member of Parliament, Owaisi, in his plea, has said that the provision invalidating Waqfs over ancient protected monuments could create conflicts.