The Indian government is staunchly defending the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, amidst challenges in the Supreme Court. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the Act regulates the secular and administrative aspects of Waqf institutions without interfering with the religious practices of Islam. The Centre asserts that Waqf, by its very nature, is a secular concept focused on the dedication of property and that the law aims to curb the misuse of Waqf provisions for encroaching on public and private lands.

The Supreme Court is currently hearing petitions challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, which amends the Waqf Act of 1995. Petitioners argue that the amendments discriminate against Muslims and represent unwarranted interference in Islamic religious affairs and the management of Waqf properties. They claim the Act allows the government to acquire Waqf properties, infringing upon the right of Muslims to manage their religious affairs. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal described the law as a "complete departure from historical legal and constitutional principles" and a means to "capture waqf through a non-judicial process."

The core of the government's defense rests on the assertion that the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, addresses critical issues related to the administration and governance of Waqf properties. The Centre argues that the amendments are necessary to prevent the misuse of Waqf properties and ensure their proper management for the benefit of the community. It emphasizes that the law only seeks to regulate the secular aspects of Waqf administration while safeguarding religious freedoms. The government also points out that the inclusion of non-Muslim members in Waqf boards is intended to promote transparency and inclusivity, as Waqf issues can affect people of all faiths. The Act allows for a limited number of non-Muslim representatives in the Waqf boards, maintaining a Muslim majority.

A key point of contention is the removal of recognition for "Waqf by user," which refers to properties recognized as Waqf based on long-term use for religious or charitable purposes, even without formal documentation. The Centre argues that allowing unregistered Waqf by user emerged during a period when formal documentation was uncommon and that it can lead to disputes and misuse. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that no one can claim rights over government land, and the government is legally empowered to reclaim properties declared as Waqf by using the Waqf by user principle.

The Supreme Court has acknowledged the "presumption of constitutionality" in favor of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, indicating that petitioners need to present a strong case for interim relief. The court has also stated it will confine to hearing only five petitioners. After hearing arguments for three days, the Supreme Court has reserved its order on interim relief. The bench, led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, has been presented with various perspectives, including concerns raised by the Kerala government, which has challenged the Act's constitutional validity. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board has also argued that the amendments infringe upon fundamental rights and were passed through a flawed parliamentary process.