New Delhi: Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, opposing the BJP leadership Central The government on Wednesday denied the allegations of the petitioners that the law in its amended form intends to occupy the property of Muslims.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opened its argument in the Supreme Court defense of law and clarified the “misleading” arguments of the petitioners, clarifying that the Center could unilaterally take it to the Waqf land.
Mehta also said that Waqf is not an essential practice of Islam because charity is practiced in all religions. In addition, he highlighted the role of the state Waqf boards, stating that they discharge a secular work unlike the board of managing Hindu settlements. In the light of various roles he performed, it was unfair to compare state Waqf boards with a Hindu settlement board.
Show full article
Mehta carried forward his arguments to include a bench under the leadership of Chief Justice Bra Gawai and to include Justice Augustine Maasih, which on Tuesday informed the petitioners that a law, which is considered legal otherwise, if a prima facie case, is capable of unmatched damage to those.
Through his arguments, Mehta sought to remove the apprehension raised by the petitioners on the acquisition of Waqf land, especially in relation to Section 3C that says that a property would not be considered as a Waqf if a claim is made that it is a government land. The petitioners have claimed that a property will stop becoming a Waqf to a specified officer, which is a hand of the government, completed the investigation on the situation of the land.
Regarding this, Mehta said that this provision only means that an entry will be done in the revenue records. This, he said, has nothing to do with the title question, which will only be determined by the court.
“The only result is that the revenue records will be corrected … The argument they repeated are that this provision allows wholesale acquisition of Waqf. It is misleading. The designated officer is not finalating the property. Only the revenue records will be updated. In the appeal by the Tribunal or High Courts, in the appeal,” Mehta presented the suggestion of the petitioners, taking out that the 1995 acting center was taken out of the 1995. Will allow
When CJI Gawai reported that according to the picture depicted by the petitioners, the property would not be a waqf until the investigation is over, Mehta said it was a “wrong and misleading tale”.
“This will be a paper entry. But if the government wants ownership, it will have to file a case for the title,” he explained.
When CJI Gawai asked if the property could be separated in such a scenario, Mehta said that this could not happen, because the status quo would have to be maintained. He said that only the character of the disputed property would be suspended and not occupied.
He also argued that Section 3C enabled the government to act as a judge in its own case and referred to the decision of the apex court, which retained the provisions of the public premises (eviction of unauthorized people) Act, 1971, which enables the government to order the government to order the assets of the government.
On the issue of registration of Waqf, Mehta said that the Muslim Waqf Act, 1923 had a provision to make this process compulsory (Section 3), but did not make any deed production mandatory. Knowledge about the origin should be given and registered.
He explained that a deliberate “story is being built” to claim where they will find documents for age-old Waqf. Mehta said that the 1923 Act itself presented the details of the Waqf and the 1954 Act also had similar provisions. The Solicitor General presented, “It is no longer for anyone that Waqf cannot be registered.”
On the Waqf-Bai-User, Mehta told the court that it was not a fundamental right and was recognized by a law. If a right is recognized by a law, it can also be taken away, he argued. According to him, Waqf is an Islamic concept, but is not an essential part of Islam, until it is established.
It is decided to suggest that charity is part of every religion. Waqf Islam has nothing but donations, he clarified.
He also challenged the constitution of state WAQF boards. Since the board has to do a secular work such as managing qualities, recording maintenance, and auditing accounts, the presence of non-Muslims on the board will not affect any religious practice, he said.
“Waqf can be anything, there can be a mosque, DargahAn orphanage, school. Many secular and charitable organizations are running. Therefore, non-Muslims may also have minority participation, as Waqf is also related to non-Muslims. Non-Muslims may be affected, affected or beneficiaries of Waqf. This is why non-Muslims have been included, “Mehta said, rejecting the claim that the amendments reorganize the board to allow non-Muslims to remain in majority in the State Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council.
(Edited by Amrtansh Arora)
Also read: Acquisition of WAQF assets by Legislative Diktat – Initial arguments of symbol for petitioners in SC