Supreme Court Concludes Waqf Law Hearing: Centre Defends it as ‘Secular’, Verdict Reserved

National News: The ongoing debate in the Supreme Court regarding the Waqf Amendment Act 2025 has finally ended. In the absence of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, a bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Christ heard the arguments of the opposition and the opposition on this controversial law continuously for three days.

While the central government strongly defended this law, the petitioners challenged its constitutional validity, calling it unconstitutional. The court has currently reserved the decision in this case.

What is the matter?

Several petitions were filed in the Supreme Court regarding the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, in which the constitutional validity of this law was questioned. The petitioners argue that this law gives the government the power to seize non-judicial assets in the name of Waqf properties, and this law violates the basic spirit of the Indian Constitution, secularism, and the right to property.

A sharp debate lasted for three days

During the hearing of this sensitive case, veteran lawyers of the country presented the side in the Supreme Court. On behalf of the petitioners, senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and Rajiv Dhawan argued, while Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended the law on behalf of the central government.

Kapil Sibal said in his argument that "the government cannot decide which issues can be raised for constitutional debate. Under this amendment law, the Waqf Board has been given so much power that it can declare any property as a waqf, which leads to violation of personal property rights."

Center's stance: 'Waqf a secular concept.'

During the hearing, the central government strongly supported the constitutional validity of the Waqf Act. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued, "Waqf is basically a secular concept, which is not only limited to the assets of the Muslim community but is also used to fulfill the objectives related to widespread public interest." This law is designed keeping in mind the multicultural structure of the country and has no unconstitutionality."

He also argued that giving an interim order against the law passed by Parliament would be a serious constitutional issue, and this would also raise questions on the dignity of the legislative process.

Question on non-informing rights of assets declared Waqf

The petitioners underlined the three major points in the Waqf law demanding an interim order:

• Waqf Board rights on non-irregular properties: The petitioners objected that under the amendment, the Waqf Board has the right to declare any property as Waqf, even if it is not notified. This saves the property owners no effective option of appeal.
• Structure of Waqf Boards: The petitioners argued that the involvement of Muslims only in the Waqf Board violates the fundamental rights of people of other religions, especially when a property is of non-Muslims and declared a vaqf.
• Question on the role of collector: The third important issue was that if the collector concludes in his investigation that a property is government land, then that property would not be considered as Waqf. The petitioners say that this provision is against the safety of Waqf properties and weakens their validity.

Center affidavit: Answer in 1332 pages

On April 25, the Ministry of Minority Affairs filed a detailed 1332-page affidavit in the court, in which the constitutional validity of the amendment was explained in detail. It said that this law has been passed by Parliament, and stopping it will have to cross the limit of judicial activism.

Waqf property dispute: old but vivid issue

Controversy over Waqf properties in India is not new. Millions of acres of land are recorded in the name of Waqf boards across the country, out of which a large number of properties are controversial or victims of encroachment. In many states, legal disputes over such assets have been going on for years.

Through the Waqf Amendment Act 2025, the government has given more powers to the Waqf boards, so that they can control the properties better. But at the same time it is also being feared that these powers may be misused.

Constitutional Question: Is this law against secularism?

This case is not just a legal debate, but the original soul of the Indian Constitution is also at stake. The main argument of the petitioners is that this law gives unfair privileges to religious institutions in secular India.

Political analysts and constitutional experts say that this law collides with fundamental rights and property rights. Also, if a private property is declared a waqf without a judicial process, it can become a dangerous example.

Everyone's eyes set on the decision

Now that the Supreme Court has reserved the verdict, curiosity in legal, social, and political circles has increased across the country. If the court stops interim on some sections of this law or declares it unconstitutional, it will be a historic decision. At the same time, if the court gives a decision in favor of the central government, then the powers of the Waqf boards will be stronger.

Law vs. Constitution fight

The Supreme Court hearing on the Waqf Amendment Act has once again raised the question of whether religion-based property control is justified in a secular nation like India. This case is not only about Waqf properties but also about protecting the Constitution of India, secularism, and private rights.

It remains to be seen what decision the Supreme Court gives in this complicated and sensitive case. This decision will have a far-reaching impact on the role of religious institutions in the future, the limit of government powers, and the interpretation of private property rights.