Last update:
The Supreme Court asked the center on Wednesday if Muslims would be allowed to be part of the Hindu religious trusts that convert the audience of pleas that challenge the constitutional validity of the WAQF Law (amendment), 2025.
The WAQF bill (amendment), 2024, presented at the Lok Sabha on August 28, seeks to amend the WAQF law, 1995. (Archive).
WAQF Law in the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court set the willingness to include non -Muslims in the Central Council of Waqf on Wednesday and asked the government if it would allow Muslims to be part of the Hindu endowment boards.
Upon listening to a lot of requests against the Waqf Constitutional Validity Law (amendment), a bank of the President of the Supreme Court Sanjiv Khanna and Judges Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan observed that “undo the WAQF by users” create. “
Read more: If ‘WAQF is derived by the user’, it will create problems: the Court Superior to the Center
Then, the court moved to the composition of the WAQF Central Council under the new law. CJI Khanna then asked a significant question. “Mr. Mehta, are you saying that you will allow Muslims to be part of the Hindu endowment joints? Tell it openly.”
The bank asked the Tushar MEHTA Tushar Plies, appearing for the center on how “WAQF per user” can be rejected, since many will not have documents required to register said WAQFS. The Superior Court also said that many mosques were built in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and that demanding that they produce facts was impossible.
“How will you register such WAQFS by the user? What documents will they have? Will it lead to undoing something. Yes, there is a misuse. But there is genuine too. I have gone to Throgh privileged accountant. Ity. Waq. Be a problem.
“Waqf by User” refers to a practice in which a property recognizes a religius or a charitable endowment (WAQF) based on its uninterrupted long -term use for such, also if there is a formal.
Central points for inclined law and waqf
The general of Platreator Tushar Mehta, while presenting his arguments, said it was a large part of the Muslims who do not want to be governed by the Muslim Board. He also said that the new WAQF law is more inclusive, before it used to be only Shií and Sunita, now even the sects of the Muslim community will have representation in the Council.
Then, the bank asked Mehta: “Are you saying that from now on you will allow Muslims to be part of the Hindu endowment tables? Tell it openly.”
The Apex court said that when a public trust was declared 100 or 200 years ago, it could not be tasks by the WAQF Board and declared otherwise.
Read more: ‘Mosques of the fourteenth, fifteenth, seventeenth, seventeenth
“You can’t rewrite the past,” said the bank.
Mehta said that a joint parliamentary committee had 38 sessions and examined 98.2 Lakh memoranda before the both houses of the Parliament approved it. CJI Khanna also said that a superior court could be asked to deal with supplications.
“There are two aspects that we want to ask both sides to address. First, whether we must entertain or relegate it to the Superior Court? Secondly, point out in the letter what is reality and want to discuss?” We are not saying that there is any bar in SC at the hearing, deciding supplications against the law, “the CJI maid.
WAQF 2025 law
The Center recently notified the WAQF (amendment) law of 2025, which is considered President Droupadi Murmu on April 5 after his approval of Parliament after heated debates in both chambers.
Several Muslim organizations and parties, including the Muslim Personal Law Board throughout India (AIMPLB), and Jamiat Ulama-E-Hind, Dravid 72 Petits The Valentity of the AT.
They affirmed that the law is discriminatory towards the Muslim community and violates their fundamental rights.
It was approved in Rajya Sabha with 128 votes in favor and 95 opposing it, after a debate of 13 hours after midnight. He was authorized in the Lok Sabha in a vote of 288-232 after a 12-hour debate.
Meanwhile, the center, on April 8, presented a warning in the Apex court and requested a hearing before any order was approved in the matter.
(With agencies inputs)
