New Delhi, – The contentious Waqf Amendment Bill, 2025, passed by both houses of Parliament earlier this week, has now reached the Supreme Court, with All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi and Congress MP Mohammad Jawed filing separate petitions challenging its constitutional validity.
Meanwhile, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has sought an urgent meeting with President Droupadi Murmu to express their apprehensions before the bill receives presidential assent, escalating the controversy surrounding the legislation.
Petitions Challenge the Bill
On Friday, April 4, just hours after the bill cleared the Rajya Sabha with 128 votes in favor and 95 against, Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi and Kishanganj MP Mohammad Jawed moved the Supreme Court, arguing that the amendments violate fundamental rights enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
The bill, which had earlier passed the Lok Sabha on April 3 with a vote of 288 to 232, seeks to reform the management and administration of Waqf properties but has been met with fierce opposition from several political leaders and Muslim organizations.
In his petition, Owaisi contended that the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, “irreversibly dilutes” the statutory protections afforded to Waqf properties, stripping them of autonomy and legal safeguards that remain intact for Hindu, Jain, and Sikh religious endowments.
He argued that the inclusion of non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards undermines the religious autonomy of the Muslim community, violating Articles 14 (equality before the law), 15 (prohibition of discrimination), and 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs) of the Constitution.
Also Read | SP MLA Abu Azmi Calls Suspension Unfair, Says His Life and Family Are in Danger
Owaisi’s plea further highlighted the removal of the “Waqf by user” provision, which he claimed limits the Waqf Tribunal’s ability to recognize properties based on historical usage—a principle upheld by the Supreme Court in past judgments, including the Ayodhya Ram Temple case.
Congress MP Mohammad Jawed, a member of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) that scrutinized the bill, echoed similar sentiments in his petition. He alleged that the legislation imposes “arbitrary restrictions” on Waqf properties and their management, disproportionately increasing state interference compared to other religious endowments.
Jawed’s plea, filed through advocate Anas Tanwir, pointed out that while Hindu and Sikh trusts enjoy self-regulation, the amendments mandate non-Muslim representation in Waqf bodies, which he termed an “unwarranted interference” in religious governance.
He also criticized a clause requiring individuals to have practiced Islam for at least five years to create a Waqf, calling it an unfounded restriction that infringes upon Article 25 (freedom to practice religion).
Both petitions urged the Supreme Court to intervene and strike down the bill, asserting that it discriminates against the Muslim community and threatens the secular fabric of the nation.
AIMPLB Seeks Presidential Intervention
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board has requested an urgent meeting with President Droupadi Murmu to present their concerns before she grants assent to the bill, the final step required for it to become law.
The AIMPLB, a prominent body representing Muslim interests in India, has labeled the amendments as an “attack on Muslim religious rights” and argued that they undermine the community’s ability to manage its charitable and religious properties. The board’s move reflects growing unease within Muslim organizations, some of which have already staged protests in cities like Kolkata and Chennai following the bill’s passage.
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, introduced by the government to streamline the administration of Waqf properties, has been a lightning rod for debate since its inception. The revised bill incorporates recommendations from the JPC, which examined the original draft tabled in August 2024.
Key provisions include the creation of a centralized portal for Waqf property management, the inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf boards for “inclusivity,” and a requirement that only practicing Muslims of at least five years can dedicate property to Waqf—reinstating pre-2013 rules.
The bill’s passage through Parliament was marked by heated exchanges and dramatic protests. During the Lok Sabha debate, Owaisi symbolically tore a copy of the legislation, calling it an “insult to Muslims” and likening his act to Mahatma Gandhi’s defiance of unjust laws. Opposition parties, including the Congress, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), and National Conference (NC), condemned the bill as “anti-Muslim” and “unconstitutional,” accusing the government of using its parliamentary majority to marginalize minority rights. In response, Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju defended the legislation as a “historic reform” aimed at benefiting the Muslim community, emphasizing that Waqf Boards, as statutory bodies, should reflect secular principles.
The bill’s passage has triggered widespread backlash. Independent MP Pappu Yadav remarked, “When the House becomes deaf and dumb, there is no option left except the Supreme Court,” signaling a broader sentiment of frustration among opposition leaders.
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin had earlier announced that the DMK would challenge the bill in court, while National Conference MP Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi called it a “black day for democracy,” accusing the BJP of lacking the moral authority to speak for Muslims.
Beyond the political sphere, Muslim groups have taken to the streets in protest. In Srinagar, authorities closed the historic Jama Masjid and disallowed Friday prayers on April 4, citing security concerns amid outrage over the bill. Similar demonstrations erupted in Kolkata and Chennai, with protesters decrying the legislation as a step toward disenfranchising the Muslim community.
What Lies Ahead?
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the petitions filed by Owaisi and Jawed, the legal battle over the Waqf (Amendment) Bill is poised to test the balance between legislative authority and constitutional protections.
The outcome could have far-reaching implications for religious autonomy, minority rights, and the governance of Waqf properties in India. Meanwhile, the AIMPLB’s appeal to the President adds another layer of uncertainty, as her decision on assent could either pave the way for the bill’s implementation or halt its progress pending judicial review.
For now, the nation watches closely as this unfolding drama shifts from the halls of Parliament to the corridors of the judiciary, with the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, at the center of a heated debate over faith, law, and equality.
