Supreme Court Verdict on Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025

The Supreme Court (SC) delivered an interim judgment on the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.
A Bench of CJI B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih stayed certain provisions that were found “prima facie arbitrary” while refusing to suspend the law entirely.
The case revolves around balancing religious endowments, property rights, and misuse of Waqf provisions with the State’s role in regulation.

Proof of practising Islam for at least 5 years before creating a Waqf.
Section 3C: A Waqf loses its status if there is doubt that it is government property; power given to designated officers and State governments to alter records.
Abolition of “Waqf by user”: Mandatory requirement of a formal deed for recognition of Waqf.
Registration requirement: Waqfs must be registered with deed copy (earlier only application sufficed).
Representation: Increased participation of non-Muslims in Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards.
CEO of State Waqf Boards: To be from the Muslim community “as far as possible”.

1. Prima Facie Arbitrary Provisions Stayed

Section 3C proviso: Declaring Waqf as government property upon mere doubt held “totally unconstitutional”.
- Reason: Determination of property title is a judicial function, not executive.
5-year proof clause: Requirement valid in principle, but arbitrary due to lack of mechanism → stayed until government creates procedure.
Restriction on Board composition: Capped non-Muslims →
- Central Waqf Council: max 4/22 members.
- State Waqf Boards: max 3/11 members.

2. Valid Provisions Upheld

Abolition of Waqf by user: SC upheld legislature’s power to abolish it prospectively.
Mandatory registration with deed: Not arbitrary since registration has been a legal requirement since 1923.
Protected monuments: Properties notified as monuments losing Waqf status not unconstitutional.

Rampant misuse:
- Waqf land rose 116% between 2013–2024 (from ~18.29 lakh acres to ~39.21 lakh acres).
- Large-scale encroachment of govt. and private land under Waqf claims.
Historical misuse: AP Waqf Board notified thousands of govt. acres as Waqf property; SC struck it down earlier.
Registration always mandatory: Deletion of Waqf by user targets only those avoiding accountability.

Mutawallis (managers) of disputed Waqfs cannot create third-party rights until Tribunal/HC verdict.
Waqfs will not be dispossessed until title disputes are resolved judicially.

Transparent Mechanism: Govt. must design fair procedures to test 5-year faith practice clause.
Institutional Reforms: Strengthen Waqf Boards with accountability and digital property records.
Judicial Safeguards: Continue Tribunal + HC oversight on Waqf property disputes.
Balance Minority Rights with Public Interest: Protect genuine Waqfs while curbing misuse.

Important Links