Last update:
The WAQF (amendment) bill became a law on April 5 with the focus of President Murmu. Oimim Owaisi and the deputy of the Congress Jaed approached the Supreme Court for their repeal
The WAQF (amendment) law has been a challenge claiming that violates article 25 of the Constitution. (Representative/PTI file)
The WAQF (amendment) bill became a law on April 5 with the focus of President Droupadi Murmu. The bill had been approved by Lok Sabha on April 3 and subsequently approved by Rajya Sabha on April 4.
The same day, Asaduddin Owaisi of AIMIM and the deputy of the Kishanganj Congress, Mohammad Jaed, approached the Supreme Court demanding their repeal. There have been a total of 72 requests in the Supreme Court that questions the new law and requested its repeal.
This raises a question: Can the Supreme Court overcome a law approved by both Chambers of Parliament and approved by the President?
As the highest court in India, the Supreme Court has the authority to protect the constitution of being misunderstood or misuse. You can declare any unconstitutional law and revoke it, certain procedures and rules are followed. The petitioners must prove that the law in question violates the fundamental principles of the Constitution.
The WAQF (amendment) law has been a challenge claiming that it violates article 25 of the Constitution, which will guide the right to religious freedom. This article ensures that people can follow, spread and administer their religious practices and properties without interference.
It also has leg statements that the new law violates article 26, which allows religious communities to administer their own matters, as well as articles 29 and 30, which protect the rights of minorities.
This is not the first time that the Supreme Court is approached to challenge a decision of the central government. Around the last decade, several laws promulgated by the central government have faced constitutional challenges.
For example, the decision to repeal article 370 in JAMMU and Kashmir was disgusted by the Supreme Court, which ordered the Government to restore the State and carry out the elections of the Assembly in September 2024.
In another case, the Supreme Court declared the collection of political donations through unconstitutional electoral bonds, citing violations of the right to information and article 19 (1) (a). He immediately stopped the use of electoral bonds and ordered the State Bank of India to reveal information related to the subject.
However, the Supreme Court refused to prohibit the law of citizenship amendment (CAA), defending the valility of section 6a by a majority of 4-1. This matter remains pending in court.
In addition, in 2021, the Supreme Court established three agricultural laws, stating that they favored corporate interests and represented a threat to the minimum support price.
