English
English
English
Among the petitioners was the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), which welcomed the apex court’s verdict.
Petitioners welcome the SC verdict
New Delhi: Petitioners challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, on Monday expressed their relief after the Supreme Court stayed certain provisions of the law while allowing the rest to remain in force. The bench, led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice AG Masih determined there was no ground to suspend the entire law. Instead, only select problematic sections have been stayed, reports Dynamite News correspondent.
Supreme Court stays 3 provisions in Waqf Amendment Act, Board CEO must be a Muslim; Full details…
Among the petitioners was the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), which welcomed the order. AIMPLB member, Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas, said the verdict reflected many of the concerns raised by the board, including the protection of Waqf by users and monuments, as well as the scrapping of the five-year condition. “To a large extent, our points have been accepted. The interim order gives us satisfaction,” he added.
Lawyers and representatives of the petitioners said the interim order was a “step towards protecting the rights of citizens,” especially provisions that would have made it harder for people to dedicate property as Waqf.
Waqf Amendment Act: Supreme Court reserves the case, But why?
“The five-year requirement of being a practicing Muslim was arbitrary and exclusionary. The court has rightly put it on hold,” one petitioner’s counsel said. Several petitioners argued that unchecked powers of the Waqf Board have led to misuse and arbitrary decisions over property disputes. They maintained that the amendments failed to bring in transparency and instead created more hurdles.
However, as per some, the Waqf Board must be made accountable like any other public body. Instead, the law sought to tighten its control further. Today’s hearing follows the bench’s decision on May 22 to reserve its interim order on the Waqf (Amendment) Act after hearing arguments from both sides over three consecutive days.
