Waqf Act can't be called unconstitutional: Centre

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgement on a plea seeking a stay on the recently-passed Waqf Amendment Act, 2025.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih reserved its order on "interim relief" sought by the petitioners after hearing both parties - petitioners and Centre - for three consecutive days.

On Thursday, appearing on behalf of the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta concluded his arguments by posing a question: "Is the Act so atrociously unconstitutional that it can be stayed?" Mehta said that the Act "cannot" be called atrociously unconstitutional and does not deserve to be stayed at this juncture. Mehta also argued that "creating a waqf is different from donating to a waqf. Mehta also alleged that tribal lands are being grabbed under the garb of waqf.

On the other hand, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, argued that waqf is an integral part of Islam. The Centre had on Wednesday argued that though waqf is an Islamic concept, it is not an essential religious practice in Islam. Countering this claim, Sibal on Thursday contended that "charity is a fundamental tenet of Islam... This is the only religion which offers it (charity) to God. Once a charity is given to God, it's given forever. Waqf is dedication to God." Sibal further contended that the Act passed by the Centre vests with it (government) the right to declare a (waqf) property as a government property. He argued that there is "no procedure prescribed" under the Act vide which a collector will determine that a waqf property belongs to the government.

He reiterated that the Act passed is manifestly arbitrary and should be stayed. Other lawyers appearing on behalf of co-petitioners argued that the Centre has control on issues of secular activity. But on the issue of religion, the Centre cannot exercise any control.