Waqf Act legal or illegal? Supreme Court will hear today, what are the arguments of Muslim parties, what is the argument given by BJP ruled states

New Delhi: Today is a big day for the Waqf Amendment Act 2025. After the passing of this law, many Muslim organizations, state governments opposed this law and challenged its validity in the Supreme Court. Today, the future of the Waqf law will now be decided in the country’s biggest court, meaning the Supreme Court will test the Waqf law on the touchstone of the Constitution.

73 petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court regarding the Waqf Amendment Act. These petitions will be heard today by a three-judge bench of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Vishwanathan. The Muslim parties opposing this law argue that this Waqf law is an attack on the basic structure of the Constitution and its purpose is to “polarize” and “divide” the country on the basis of religion.

Arguments of the parties opposing the Waqf Act

• The Waqf Act eliminates the ability of the Muslim community to claim, defend or even define their religious properties.
• The Waqf Act destroys the democratic and representative structure of Waqf Boards by completely eliminating elections to the Waqf Board.
• Non-Muslims can be appointed to Waqf Boards, which is a direct violation of the right of the Muslim community to self-governance.
• The Waqf Amendment Act 2025 leaves the future of Waqf land at the mercy of executive authorities.
• The new Waqf Act deprives members of Scheduled Tribes of rights by preventing them from owning Waqf.
• Those opposing the Act say that the definition of Waqf itself has been changed in the new Act, the concept of Waqf by user has been removed but the concept developed by jurisprudence remains.
• The party opposing the Act argues that other stakeholders and other groups have been given unfair advantage in this Act.
• The Waqf Act takes away from Waqfs the differential protections given to Waqfs and charitable endowments of other religions.
• Waqf Amendment Act violates fundamental rights, undermines religious and cultural autonomy of Waqf Muslims
• The amendment enables arbitrary executive intervention, undermines minority rights to manage their religious and charitable institutions.
• Many Waqf properties, especially those established through oral dedications or without written documents, could be lost.
• Congress MP and party whip in Lok Sabha Mohammad Javed argued that the amendments violate Articles 14 (right to equality), 25 (freedom to practice and propagate religion), 26 (freedom of religious denominations to manage their religious affairs), 29 (rights of minorities) and 300 A (right to property) of the Constitution.
• AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi said in his petition that the controversial amendment is “in clear violation of Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30, 300A of the Indian Constitution and is clearly arbitrary”.

Arguments in support of Waqf law
While many organizations are opposing the bill, 6 BJP-ruled states – Haryana, Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Assam – have filed separate petitions in the Supreme Court supporting the constitutionality of the law. And have also explained what could be the possible legal and administrative ramifications if this law is repealed or amended.

Haryana, which has filed an intervention in the main petition, has emphasized the urgent need to improve the management of Waqf property. The state government has pointed to issues such as incomplete property survey, lack of proper accounting, long pending cases in Waqf tribunals and irregular or missing records of mutation of property. The Haryana government has argued that the amended law seeks to bring a unified structure for wakf management and ensure greater oversight of mutawallis (custodians).

The Assam petition drew attention to Section 3E of the amended law, which prohibits the declaration of any land in scheduled or tribal areas falling under the fifth or sixth schedule of the Constitution as wakf property. Assam has said that eight of its 35 districts fall under the sixth schedule and, thus, it has a direct stake in the outcome of the case.

The Maharashtra government stressed that it is important to assist the Supreme Court by providing information obtained from parliamentary records, committee recommendations and national consultations.

The Rajasthan government in its petition has raised concerns over past prevalent practices and said that properties here – whether privately owned or state-owned – were being declared wakf properties without due process. Rajasthan says the new provisions have rectified this by mandating a 90-day public notice in two widely circulated newspapers before any such announcement.

The Uttarakhand Wakf Board, which is supporting the Wakf (Amendment) Act, has also moved an application in the Supreme Court seeking permission to intervene in the writ petition filed by Owaisi challenging the constitutional validity of the law.

Two Hindu parties also challenged the Waqf Act 1955
The Supreme Court will also hear the petition of Supreme Court advocate Hari Shankar Jain today. Hari Shankar Jain has argued that some provisions of the law enable Muslims to illegally occupy government property and Hindu religious land. Another similar petition has also been filed by Noida resident Parul Kheda.

Intervention petitions in support of the law
Some intervention applications have been filed supporting the amendment in the Waqf Act. The applicants include Hindu Sena president Vishnu Gupta, All India Hindu Mahasabha member Satish Kumar Agarwal, plaintiff Mahendra Pratap Singh in the Krishna Janmabhoomi case, organization Adivasi Seva Mandal, Jai Omkar Bhilala Samaj Sangathan.