India's top court has stayed key provisions of a controversial law that seeks to change how properties donated by Muslims and worth billions of dollars are governed, but refused to strike down the law entirely.
The court was hearing petitions from Muslim groups and opposition parties against the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025, enacted by parliament in April.
The petitioners claim the law infringes on the rights of the Muslim community. In contrast, the government argues it aims to enhance the transparency of the management of Muslim properties, known as waqf.
In Islam, waqf refers to charitable or religious donations made by Muslims to mosques, madrassas, or orphanages, and such properties cannot be sold or repurposed.
The properties were previously governed by the Waqf Act of 1995, which mandated state-level waqf boards for oversight. The new law introduced measures to amend the act, including revisions on how waqf properties are classified.
On Monday, a bench led by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai refrained from completely dismantling the law, commenting that the grant of stay is only in the rarest of rare category.
However, it did obstruct a contentious provision that would enable the government to assess the status of disputed properties. Historical precedence shows numerous properties have been recognized as waqf based on long-standing community practices.
According to government statistics, out of 872,852 waqf properties in India, over 13,200 are involved in ongoing legal disputes, 58,889 have been encroached, and the status of more than 436,000 remains ambiguous.
Under the new law, waqf boards were tasked with providing documentation to substantiate claims of waqf ownership, with the government being the final arbiter in disputes. The court asserted that empowering the government to adjudicate citizens' rights violates the constitutional separation of powers.
Additionally, a provision mandating the waqf donor to be a practicing Muslim for five years was also annulled. Waqf properties are currently overseen by state boards and a central council comprised of state government nominees, Muslim representatives, legal bar members, Islamic scholars, and property managers.
The judges did permit the nomination of non-Muslims to the waqf board but confined their representation to four members in the 22-member federal board and three in the 11-member state boards. Moreover, they urged that efforts be made to appoint the chief executive officer from within the Muslim community.
This legal challenge culminated in the Supreme Court following widespread criticism of the law from Muslim organizations and opposition groups soon after its parliamentary passage in April. The top court had reserved judgment on the matter after an exhaustive three-day hearing in May.
