The Union government told the Supreme Court on Wednesday that waqf—though an Islamic concept—is not an essential part of the Islamic religion and waqf boards perform secular functions. Therefore, allowing non-Muslims in waqf boards is legally valid, the government argued.
The statement was made by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta while defending the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, which is facing several legal challenges.
“Waqf is an Islamic concept. But it is not an essential part of Islam,” Mehta told the court, adding, “Charity exists in every religion, but it doesn’t mean it’s a core religious practice.”
The case is being heard by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih.
The 2025 amendment changes the way waqf properties—land or buildings donated for religious or charitable purposes under Islamic law—are managed. One major change is removing the concept of ‘waqf by user’, which allowed land to be considered waqf if it had been used that way for a long time, even without official documents.
The petitioners, including MPs Mohammad Jawed (Congress) and Asaduddin Owaisi (AIMIM), argue that the new law discriminates against Muslims by imposing stricter conditions not applied to other religions.
“Which other religion is asked to show proof of practicing faith for 5 or 10 years before making an endowment?” argued Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, calling the amendment a violation of Article 15 (which prohibits discrimination based on religion).
Mehta argued that the amendment is meant to prevent misuse. He said that after the 2013 changes, waqf land claims increased by 116%, with many false claims being made on private and government lands.
“This law was passed after serious discussion. The Joint Parliamentary Committee met 36 times and received 96 lakh suggestions,” said Mehta.
He also claimed that unlike Hindu endowment boards, which deal directly with religious rituals, waqf boards mostly manage secular matters like property records and accounts.
“Having two non-Muslim members won’t change the character of the waqf board,” Mehta said. “They are in a microscopic minority.”
A major concern raised by petitioners is about Section 3C, which allows government officers to decide whether a waqf property is actually government or private land. Critics worry this could let the government take over waqf properties unfairly.
But Mehta denied this, saying,“It will just be a paper entry in the revenue records. The government must still go to court if it wants ownership. The final decision lies with the Waqf Tribunal, not the officer.”
The Chief Justice also questioned this point and asked if people could be evicted without going to court.
“No,” Mehta replied. “There will be no eviction unless a proper legal case is filed and won.”
He further added that anyone affected by such decisions can go to the Waqf Tribunal, appeal to the High Court, and even the Supreme Court if needed.
“It is absolutely wrong to say that Section 3C order is final,” Mehta said. “There are multiple layers of judicial review.”
The Waqf (Amendment) Act was passed in April 2025 and received the President’s approval soon after. Six BJP-ruled states—Haryana, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, and Assam—have supported the amendment in court.
Muslim leaders and civil society groups have expressed strong opposition. They say the law unfairly targets Muslim religious institutions and interferes with the community’s right to manage its own affairs under Article 26 of the Constitution.
“The law singles out Muslims and imposes conditions no other religion faces,” said a petitioner.
The Supreme Court has not yet given a verdict. On April 17, the government had assured that it would not implement key parts of the law for now. The hearing continues.
