The Waqf Act, 2025, enacted after parliamentary approval and presidential assent, introduces significant changes to the management of waqf properties—charitable endowments in Islamic law. Key provisions include the inclusion of non-Muslims on waqf boards and increased governmental oversight of waqf assets. Proponents argue these measures aim to enhance transparency and curb mismanagement. However, detractors contend that the amendments infringe upon the religious autonomy of the Muslim community and could lead to the erosion of their rights over waqf properties.
During the hearing, Chief Justice Khanna acknowledged the complexities of the issue, noting that the discourse has been predominantly adversarial. He emphasized the necessity of a balanced examination, stating that certain positive aspects of the legislation have been overlooked by both supporters and opponents.
The Supreme Court is currently deliberating over more than ten petitions filed by various political parties, religious organizations, and individuals. Notable petitioners include the Indian Union Muslim League , Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam , All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen leader Asaduddin Owaisi, and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board . These petitions argue that the Act violates fundamental rights enshrined in Articles 14, 15, 25, and 26 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before the law and the freedom to manage religious affairs.
A central point of contention is the Act's requirement for formal documentation of waqf properties, effectively invalidating oral waqfs—a traditional practice in Islamic endowment. Critics argue that this stipulation disregards the historical context in which many waqf properties were established, potentially leading to the loss of assets that lack formal records. Additionally, the Act's provision for the inclusion of non-Muslims on waqf boards has been perceived as an encroachment on the community's right to manage its religious affairs independently.
The DMK, in its petition, highlighted the potential impact of the Act on approximately 20 crore Muslims across the country, asserting that the legislation undermines the community's constitutional rights. Similarly, the AIMPLB contended that the Act discriminates against Muslims by imposing restrictions not applicable to other religious communities, thereby violating the principle of equality before the law.