Waqf (Amendment) Act hearing LIVE : वक्फ़ क़ानून पर ‘सुप्रीम’ सुनवाई में क्या-क्या हुआ? वकील से जानिए

Summary

In today’s court hearing, the Muslim side raised several objections to the 2025 amendment law, including concerns about judicial remedies, the government’s control over waqf properties, the registration process, and the involvement of non-Muslims in the Waqf Board. The government countered these objections by clarifying that judicial remedies remain intact, waqf properties will not be unlawfully seized, and the registration of waqf properties is essential for transparency. With the application of limitation laws and the five-year practice requirement for making waqf, the case continues to unfold, with further hearings scheduled for tomorrow, potentially leading to an interim order from the Supreme Court.

Takeaways

• 😀 Muslim parties raised four main objections regarding the 2025 Amendment Act, including the removal of judicial remedies, government takeover of Waqf property, and processes related to Waqf in tribal areas.
• 😀 The Indian government, represented by the Solicitor General, clarified that judicial remedies remain available under Section 83 of the Act and that affected parties can approach tribunals for resolutions.
• 😀 A major point raised was the concern that the new law might lead to the illegal seizure of Waqf property, especially if documentation is lacking. The government emphasized that registration within six months of the amendment is required to maintain legal status of Waqf property.
• 😀 The government stressed the importance of registration of Waqf properties to keep track of them and ensure public benefits, with a clear deadline for registration set at six months post-amendment.
• 😀 There is a rule that only those who have practiced Islam for at least five years can establish Waqf, aiming to prevent issues related to Muslim women marrying tribal men and later being coerced into giving away their inheritance.
• 😀 Another objection from the Muslim community was the inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf boards, to which the Solicitor General cited a Supreme Court judgment stating that Waqf is a charitable act, not an integral part of Islam, and thus subject to legal regulation.
• 😀 The Solicitor General explained that Waqf, similar to charitable trusts, is not a religious obligation but a voluntary donation and therefore can be governed by law without violating religious principles.
• 😀 The new law introduces a limitation period for Waqf property, which was previously not applicable. This change ensures that properties held under Waqf by non-Muslims also come under the new limitation rules.
• 😀 The limitation period ensures that properties only qualify as Waqf if they were registered within the specified time frame, and properties outside this period will not be recognized as Waqf.
• 😀 The Supreme Court is still deliberating whether to issue an interim order regarding the implementation of the amendment, with further hearings scheduled to determine whether a temporary ruling will be passed.

Q & A

What is the main topic of the Supreme Court hearing discussed in the transcript?

The Supreme Court hearing revolves around challenges to the amended Waqf Act of 2025, focusing on its provisions related to the management of Waqf properties and their registration.

What were the four main objections raised by the Muslim side in the case?

The Muslim side raised four objections: 1) Removal of judicial remedies for Waqf disputes, 2) Takeover of Waqf properties by the government, 3) Authority to initiate proceedings without tribunal intervention, and 4) Takeover of Waqf land in tribal areas.

How did the government respond to the objection about the removal of judicial remedies?

The Solicitor General clarified that judicial remedies were not removed. Section 83 of the amended Waqf Act ensures that all judicial remedies are still available to stakeholders.

What does the government say about the concern of taking over Waqf properties?

The government assured that the law does not allow arbitrary confiscation of Waqf properties. The amendment only requires proper documentation and registration of these properties to ensure transparency.

What was the government's explanation regarding the objection about initiating proceedings without a tribunal's decision?

The Solicitor General explained that if any proceedings are initiated by the competent authority, the aggrieved party has the right to appeal to a tribunal for resolution.

How did the government address the concern of Waqf being integral to Islam?

The government argued that Waqf is a charitable donation and not an integral part of Islam, citing a previous Supreme Court judgment that defined Waqf as a form of donation, not a fundamental religious practice.

What is the significance of the registration process introduced in the amended law?

The registration process is crucial for ensuring transparency and public welfare. It allows the government to keep accurate data on Waqf properties, ensuring they are properly documented and managed.

Why has the government introduced the Limitation Act in the amended Waqf law?

The Limitation Act was introduced to ensure that properties are properly recognized as Waqf only if they are registered within a specified period. This provision aims to avoid misuse and establish clear legal boundaries.

What impact does the government's response have on the public perception of Waqf property management?

The government's response aims to dispel fears about the wrongful seizure of Waqf properties, emphasizing that proper registration and legal procedures will be followed to protect Waqf assets from misuse.

What will happen in the next hearing of the case?

The next hearing is scheduled to consider whether the Supreme Court will issue an interim order regarding the implementation of the amended Waqf law. The government has agreed not to implement the contested provisions until the court's decision.