Courts cannot interfere unless 'very strong' case is made, says CJI amid Waqf Act hearing

The Supreme Court on Tuesday resumed hearings on a batch of petitions challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, with Chief Justice of India BR Gavai underscoring that courts do not usually interfere with laws unless a “very strong case” is made out due to the presumption of constitutionality that applies to all statutes passed by Parliament, reported Bar and Bench (B&B).

Appearing for the petitioners, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal launched a sharp attack on the new law, calling it a legislative attempt to “capture waqf properties” under the guise of reform. He argued the Act violates Articles 14 (equality before law), 25 (freedom of religion), and 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs) of the Constitution.

“The entire idea of waqf is that it’s my property, but it’s being taken away with a legislative diktat,” Sibal told the bench, asserting that the amended law allows for private property to be expropriated without due process.

He also criticised new provisions requiring individuals to prove that they are “practising Muslims” to be associated with waqf administration, asking: “Why do I have to prove that I’m a practising Muslim?”
&
According to B&B, the CJI countered, “It is about constitutionality… Courts don’t usually interfere... unless you make a very strong case.”

CJI Gavai also responded personally to Sibal's remarks about resource disparities between mosques and temples. When Sibal pointed out that mosques do not receive offerings like temples, Gavai noted, “I’ve visited churches, dargahs… it is often done.” Sibal replied, “I’m talking about mosques,” reiterating his point that state interference is unjustified regardless of religious funding structures.

Key Issues Under Supreme Court Review:
On May 20, the court stated it would focus on three specific issues in the current stage of hearings:

1. Power to denotify waqf properties, including those declared as waqf by court rulings, waqf-by-user, or waqf by deed.
2. Inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council, challenged as unconstitutional interference in religious institutions.
3. Collector’s authority to reclassify waqf land as government land through an administrative inquiry.

The bench clarified it is not considering any plea to stay provisions of the erstwhile 1995 Waqf Act during this phase.

Background and Legislative Controversy:
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 was notified on April 5 after receiving President Droupadi Murmu’s assent, following its passage in Lok Sabha (288 in favor, 232 against) and Rajya Sabha (128 in favor, 95 against). The Centre filed a 1,332-page affidavit defending the law, arguing against any “blanket stay” and stressing that the law carries the presumption of constitutionality.

On April 17, the Centre assured the court that it would not denotify waqf properties or make appointments to waqf boards until May 5. The Centre had earlier opposed interim relief, especially on the inclusion of non-Muslims in the waqf bodies.

Transfer of Bench:
The matter was previously heard by a bench headed by former CJI Sanjiv Khanna, who retired on May 13, after which the case was assigned to the bench of CJI B R Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih.

The hearing remains ongoing, with Sibal continuing arguments on constitutional violations and implications for minority rights. The court has so far indicated it is open to considering interim directions but will require compelling legal grounds to strike down or stay any part of the law.