Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads
#Pahalgam Terrorist Attack
India stares at a 'water bomb' threat as it freezes Indus TreatyIndia readies short, mid & long-term Indus River plansShehbaz Sharif calls India's stand "worn-out narrative"Several fresh pleas, which are yet to be listed, were filed in the top court subsequently including the ones filed by TMC MP Mahua Moitra, Samajwadi Party MP from Sambhal, Zia-ur-Rahman Barq.
The YSRCP-led by former Andhra Pradesh chief minister Jagan Mohan Reddy, the Communist Party of India (CPI), Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam chief and actor-turned-politician Vijay have also moved the top court on the issue.
Advocate Hari Shankar Jain and one Mani Munjal have also filed a separate petition challenging the constitutional validity of several provisions of the law on the ground that they violate fundamental rights of non-Muslims following which the CJI agreed to list it.
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads
The Centre, on April 8, filed a caveat in the apex court and sought a hearing before any order was passed in the matter.
Popular in India
A caveat is filed by a party in the high courts and the apex court to ensure that no orders are passed without hearing it.
The Centre recently notified the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, which got the assent of President Droupadi Murmu on April 5 after its passage from Parliament following heated debates in both houses.
The bill was passed in the Rajya Sabha with 128 members voting in favour and 95 opposing it.
It was cleared by the Lok Sabha with 288 members supporting it and 232 against it.
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), Congress MPs Imran Pratapgarhi and Mohammad Jawed are other key petitioners.
On April 7, a bench headed by the CJI assured senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, to consider listing the petitions.
The DMK moved the top court through its deputy general secretary A Raja and said in a press release, "Despite widespread opposition, the Waqf Amendment Bill, 2025 was passed by the union government without proper consideration of the objections raised by the members of the JPC and the other stakeholders."
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads
The AIMPLB filed the plea in the top court late April 6.
In a press statement, S Q R Ilyas, the AIMPLB spokesperson, said the petition strongly objected to the amendments passed by Parliament for being "arbitrary, discriminatory and based on exclusion".
The amendments, it said, not only violated the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India but also clearly revealed the government's intention to take complete control over the administration of Waqf, therefore, sidelining the Muslim minority from managing their own religious endowments.
Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution ensure freedom of conscience, the right to practice, propagate religion, and the right to establish and manage institutions for religious and charitable purposes, it said.
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind also filed a petition in the apex court, claiming it was a "dangerous conspiracy" to strip Muslims of their religious freedom.
In its petition, Jamiat said the law was a "direct attack on the country's Constitution, which not only provides equal rights to its citizens but also grants them complete religious freedom".
In its separate plea filed in the top court, Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema, a religious organisation of Sunni Muslim scholars and clerics in Kerala, has claimed the Act was a "blatant intrusion" into the rights of a religious denomination to manage its own affairs in the matter of religion.
Jawed's plea alleged the Act imposed "arbitrary restrictions" on Waqf properties and their management, undermining the Muslim community's religious autonomy.
The petition, filed through advocate Anas Tanwir, said the law discriminated against the Muslim community by "imposing restrictions" missing from the governance of other religious endowments.
"This diminishing of the protection given to Waqfs while retaining them for religious and charitable endowments of other religions constitutes hostile discrimination against Muslims and is violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, which prohibit discrimination on the grounds of religion," said Owaisi's plea, filed through advocate Lzafeer Ahmad.
NGO Association for the Protection of Civil Rights also filed a petition in the apex court challenging the constitutional validity of the Act.
AAP MLA Khan sought the law declared as unconstitutional, being violative of "Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300-A of the Constitution".
