The Supreme Court of India has partially stayed the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, while refusing to stay the Act in its entirety. The court's decision comes after the Act was challenged by several politicians, activists, and civic groups who argued that it discriminated against the Muslim community.

A key provision that the Supreme Court stayed requires a person creating a waqf (waqif) to demonstrate that they have been practicing Islam for at least five years. The court found that while the provision itself wasn't inherently discriminatory, the absence of a clear mechanism to verify Islamic practice made it unsustainable and potentially leading to arbitrary exercise of power. This particular section will remain suspended until state governments establish rules and guidelines for determining who qualifies as a "practicing Muslim".

In addition to the five-year practice rule, the Supreme Court also stayed certain elements of Section 3C of the Act. This section deals with government property "identified or declared" as Waqf property. The court's stay specifically addresses provisions that allowed a government-designated officer to decide disputes on whether a Waqf property encroaches on government land. The Supreme Court observed that allowing executive officers to adjudicate citizens' rights violates the separation of powers. The court also restricted the creation of third-party rights over such disputed properties until tribunals decide the matter. These changes effectively mean that a property will not be removed from Waqf status until an officer submits a report on its status and corrections in revenue records cannot be made based solely on a government officer's determination. The Court clarified that property titles will not be affected, and Waqfs will not be dispossessed until the final adjudication of the matter, through the Waqf Tribunal and higher courts, as the case may be.

However, the Supreme Court did not stay the provision allowing for the nomination of non-Muslim members to Waqf Boards. The Court suggested that, as far as possible, the ex-officio member of the Board should be a Muslim person. It also specified that the Central Waqf Council should consist of no more than four non-Muslim members, and State Waqf Boards should have no more than three.

The Supreme Court clarified that its observations are preliminary and will not prevent parties from further challenging the Act's validity. The court also addressed concerns about mandatory registration of waqfs, noting that registration had been mandatory in the past and unregistered waqfs could still be registered. The court upheld the requirement that only property owned by the person creating the waqf can be dedicated, aligning with Islamic jurisprudence and principles of charity.

The Centre has reacted to the Supreme Court's order, with Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju stating that the court "upheld the decision made in the Parliament". Meanwhile, the Congress party has welcomed the stay on the "practicing Muslim for five years" clause, viewing it as a check on the government's power. AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi expressed hope that the Supreme Court would soon pass its final verdict on the entire legislation.