Supreme Court Hearing on Waqf Act: petitioners to stay focused on the legal points raised in their petitions and avoid digressing into broader socio-political arguments.

New Delhi, April 16, 2025 — The Supreme Court today heard a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf Act. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal led the arguments on behalf of the petitioners, focusing on religious freedom, property rights, and the limits of state intervention.
Key Issues and Arguments Raised:

1. Violation of Article 26 – Religious Freedom
   Kapil Sibal argued that the new Waqf law infringes upon Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs in matters of religion. He emphasized that denying a person the right to donate property merely because they have not been a practicing Muslim for five years is unconstitutional.
2. Right to Property and State Overreach
   Sibal contended that the individual has full ownership of their property and the state cannot dictate who is eligible to donate or endow it. He questioned the rationale behind the state’s power to decide who qualifies as a religious heir.
3. Comparison with Hindu Succession Laws
   He drew comparisons with Hindu inheritance laws, pointing out that while Parliament has legislated for Hindus, similar processes are being followed for Muslims. He argued this must not upset the religious balance or fundamental rights.
4. Women’s Rights in Inheritance
   Referring to reforms in Muslim personal law, Sibal noted that earlier women were denied inheritance, but the new law provides them that right. He questioned why the state should decide religious eligibility in donating property when it’s fundamentally a personal right.

Key Observations from the Court:

• CJI’s Crucial Comment on Article 26:
  Chief Justice of India stated, “Article 26 is secular and applies equally to all communities.” He clarified that laws made for Hindus do not negate the constitutional validity of laws made for Muslims, as long as due parliamentary procedure is followed.
• The bench underlined that religious freedom as enshrined in Article 26 is not exclusive to any one faith and applies across the spectrum of religions.

Current Status and the Road Ahead:

Over 70 petitions have been filed challenging various aspects of the Waqf Act. Senior lawyers like Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and Rajeev Dhavan are representing the petitioners. The Solicitor General is expected to respond on behalf of the government in upcoming hearings.

The Chief Justice has repeatedly urged the petitioners to stay focused on the legal points raised in their petitions and avoid digressing into broader socio-political arguments.