The petitioners argued that the Muslim community were imposed unfair requirements on them for registration of properties as Waqf while endowments made by other religious communities are not subject to such onerous conditions.
Appearing on behalf of the petitioners, senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the Waqf Amendment Act is “manifestly arbitrary” and designed to “expropriate the rights” of Muslims. Sibal argued that “irreparable injury will be caused if the provisions are activated”.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, also appearing on behalf of the co-petitioners, argued that the concept of endowments exists in every religion. “Which other religion, while making a religious endowment, is asked for proof of practising that religion for five or ten years? This provision goes short of violating Article 15,” Singhvi contended.
During the hearing, a division bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih observed that for a stay of the statute, a strong case has to be made out by the petitioners.
“There is a presumption of constitutionality in favour of every statute. For interim relief, you have to make out a very strong and glaring case. Otherwise, presumption of constitutionality will be there,” CJI Gavai verbally remarked.At the outset of Tuesday’s hearing, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta submitted that the hearing was meant to be confined to three issues, which were flagged by the previous bench on April 16. However, the written submissions filed by the petitioners addressed more issues, the SG said. The claim was strongly contested by the counsels for petitioners.During the day-long hearing, Sibal argued that under the previous law, non-registration did not affect the validity of the Waqfs and the only consequence was that the Muttawalli would have to pay some penalty. However, the 2025 amendment makes a “complete departure” to state that if there was no registration, the Waqf will no longer be recognised, he argued. The Centre will submit its counter on Wednesday.
In its response filed last month, the Centre had told the Supreme Court that the Waqf (Amendment) Act “by confining itself to non-essential practices, steers well clear of infringing upon the religious freedom guaranteed by the Constitution”.
An affidavit was filed by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) in response to the petitions challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act. The Centre has submitted that the amendments to the Waqf Act were brought about after a comprehensive, in-depth, and analytical study conducted by a parliamentary panel.
The affidavit adds that a “deliberate, purposeful and intentionally misleading narrative is built very mischievously, giving the impression that those Waqfs, including ‘Waqf by user’, which do not have documents to support their claims, will be affected. This is not only untrue and false but purposefully and deliberately misleading the court”.
