In a significant interim order, the Supreme Court on Monday stayed certain contentious provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, while refusing to suspend the entire statute. The Court said it found no case for staying the amendment in toto, but noted that some provisions conferred arbitrary or constitutionally suspect powers, warranting immediate restraint until the petitions challenging the law are finally decided.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India B R Gavai held that the requirement for a person to be a practising Muslim for at least five years before dedicating property as waqf will remain stayed until States frame rules to determine how such a claim of faith can be verified. “Without any such rule or mechanism, the provision will lead to arbitrary exercise of power,” the Court observed.
The top Court also restrained the Collector from adjudicating the rights of citizens in relation to waqf property, holding that this would violate the constitutional principle of separation of powers. “The Collector cannot be permitted to adjudicate civil disputes between private parties. Until the Waqf Tribunal examines such disputes, no third-party rights shall be created,” the order clarified.
On the controversial provision permitting non-Muslims to be included in waqf bodies, the Court allowed limited operation but imposed safeguards that not more than three non-Muslim members can be included in any state waqf board, and in total not more than four non-Muslim members in waqf councils. This compromise, the Court noted, ensures inclusivity without altering the essential character of a religious trust.
However, the Court refused to stay the mandatory registration of waqf properties, noting that similar provisions had existed in earlier enactments. Addressing concerns about the rigid timelines for registration under the new law, the Court said it had accounted for this in its order. “We have held registration from 1995 to 2013 and again now. So we have held registration is not new,” CJI said while dictating the operative portion of the interim order.
The order also did not stay the government's decision to delete waqf-by-user from the statutory definition of waqf. However, it granted interim protection to waqfs by users.
In this regard, the Court stated that revenue records concerning existing waqfs cannot be altered by Collectors right away (Section 3C), unless a waqf tribunal first decides on such disputes, which decision can further be subjected to an appeal before the High Court.
"It is directed that unless the issue with regard to title of the waqf property in terms of Section 3C of the Amended Waqf Act is not finally decided in the proceedings initiated under Section 83 of the Amended Waqf Act by the Tribunal and subject to further orders by the High Court, neither the waqfs will be dispossessed of the property nor the entry in the revenue record and the records of the Board shall be affected. However, upon commencement of an inquiry under Section 3C of the Amended Waqf Act till the final determination by the Tribunal under Section 83 of the Amended Waqf Act, subject to further orders of the High Court in an appeal, no third-party rights would be created in respect of such properties," the judgment stated.
The Court also clarified that its observations are only prima facie in nature and will not prevent parties from making further submissions on the validity of the Act.
Why the order matters
The 2025 amendment to the Waqf Act, passed amid heated parliamentary debate, has faced criticism from both community bodies and civil rights activists. The challenges before the Court argue that the amendments alter the religious and charitable character of waqf, vest disproportionate powers in the state, and create arbitrary distinctions that infringe Articles 14 (equality) and 25 (freedom of religion) of the Constitution.
By staying only select provisions, the Court has signaled caution; it does not want to paralyze the law entirely but has acknowledged that some clauses, if implemented, could lead to irreparable consequences.
The road ahead
The interim order is both a relief and a warning for the government. Relief, because the Court has not suspended the amendment altogether, and warning, because the provisions stayed go to the heart of criticisms that the law centralizes power and dilutes the autonomy of waqf institutions.
For the Muslim community, the order protects core concerns, preventing arbitrary questioning of faith, limiting executive intrusion in adjudication, and safeguarding the religious identity of waqf bodies.
The constitutional challenge will now proceed to a full hearing. Monday’s order sets the stage for a broader debate on how far the State can regulate religious trusts without crossing into the domain of faith and fundamental rights.