The Supreme Court (SC) has declined to put a stay on the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, but has put a halt to the operation of certain provisions. The court stated that there is a "presumption" of constitutionality in favor of the law.

In an interim order, a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih said that they considered the challenges to each section and found no case was made out to stay the entire statute. However, the court decided to stall the implementation of certain provisions to balance the interests of the involved parties while awaiting a detailed judgment.

Key Provisions Stayed

• Five-Year Practice of Islam: The Supreme Court stayed the provision stating that only those who have been practicing Islam for the last five years can create a Waqf. The court ordered that this clause of Section 3 of the Amended Waqf Act will remain suspended until the state governments frame rules for determining whether a person has been practicing Islam for at least five years or not. The court reasoned that without a proper mechanism, the provision could lead to an arbitrary exercise of power.
• Determination of Property Status: The court also stayed a section of the amended law that allowed an officer designated by the government, above the rank of collector, to begin an inquiry into the status of a property as Waqf and potentially declare government land as Waqf property. The court said that allowing the collector to determine the rights is against the separation of powers, and the executive cannot be permitted to determine the rights of citizens. The court clarified that until the Waqf tribunal makes a final determination, subject to further orders of the high court, no third-party rights could be created in respect to such properties.
• The court also stayed the operation of Section 3C(3), which authorized the officer to declare a property as government land and alter revenue records, and Section 3C(4), which required the state government to direct the Waqf Board to correct its records based on the officer's findings.

Other Observations and Directions

• Non-Muslim Representation: Addressing the composition of the Central Waqf Council and boards, the court directed that the Central Waqf Council should not consist of more than four non-Muslim members out of 22. Similarly, the court directed that the state Waqf Boards should not include more than three non-Muslim members out of 11.
• CEO of Waqf Board: While the court did not stay the provision of Section 23 of the Act, it directed that as far as possible, an effort should be made to appoint a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the board from amongst the Muslim community.
• No stay on entire statute: The bench found that no case was made out to stay the entire Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The court chose not to interfere with the requirement of mandatory registration of Waqfs, noting that this condition also existed in previous Acts.
• The Supreme Court rejected arguments against confining Waqf to Muslims and barring non-Muslims from dedicating their properties, stating that the petitioners themselves argued Waqf is specific to Islam.

The court made it clear that these directions are prima facie and interim in nature, and they would not prevent the petitioners or the government from advancing full arguments on the constitutional validity of the law at the stage of the final hearing. The detailed judgment is awaited.