New Delhi — The Supreme Court on Sunday (September 14) issued an interim order on challenges to the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025, staying a few contentious provisions while refusing to suspend the entire law. A bench led by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih clarified that only specific sections would be put on hold to prevent arbitrariness and uphold constitutional principles.

Key provisions stayed

The bench first addressed the new requirement that a person must have practised Islam for at least five years to create a waqf. The Court observed that, while the intent was not arbitrary and aimed at preventing misuse, the absence of a mechanism to determine whether a person had genuinely practised Islam for five years could lead to arbitrary application. The provision has therefore been stayed until State Governments frame rules for implementation.

Secondly, the Court suspended clauses that allowed the government to derecognise a waqf property during the pendency of an encroachment dispute. The proviso to Section 3C(2), as well as Sections 3C(3) and 3C(4), were stayed. The bench reasoned that permitting the Collector or a government officer to decide property rights violated the doctrine of separation of powers. It ruled that questions of title must be settled by tribunals or courts, not by the executive.

However, the Court directed that no third-party rights should be created on disputed lands until the matter is resolved.

Directions on membership

The Court also laid down interim directions regarding representation in waqf bodies.

  • In the Central Waqf Council, the number of non-Muslim members cannot exceed four.
  • In State Waqf Boards, non-Muslim members cannot exceed three.

The Court did not stay the controversial provision allowing a non-Muslim to serve as the CEO of a State Waqf Board, but remarked that as far as possible, a Muslim person should be appointed.

Provisions left untouched

Other significant provisions of the Amendment Act — including the abolition of waqf-by-user, the bar on creating waqfs over Scheduled Areas and protected monuments, and the application of the Limitation Act to waqf matters — remain in force. The Court also declined to interfere with registration requirements and the rule that only Muslims can create waqfs.

Court’s reasoning

CJI Gavai, pronouncing the order, noted that “only in the rarest of rare cases a legislation can be stayed by the Court.” While petitioners had challenged the entire Act, the bench held that no case was made to halt the statute in its entirety. Instead, the Court balanced competing interests by issuing a tailored interim order.

“The prayer for stay of the impugned Act is, therefore, rejected. However, in order to protect the interest of all the parties and balance the equities during pendency of this batch of matters, we issue the following directions,” the Chief Justice said.

Conclusion

By striking down only select provisions, the Supreme Court has sought to maintain the functioning of the Waqf (Amendment) Act while ensuring constitutional safeguards against arbitrariness and executive overreach. The matter will be heard further, and the final fate of the challenged provisions will depend on a full adjudication.