There Is A System In Place: CJI Rebukes Kapil Sibal For Mentioning Pleas Challenging Waqf Amendment Act For Urgent Listing

In a brief but notable exchange during the morning mentioning in the Supreme Court, Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna firmly reminded Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi to adhere to established procedures after they sought to mention a petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025.

“We have moved a petition to challenge the Waqf Act,” Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal submitted, rising to inform the Bench during the mentioning period. He was joined by Senior Advocate Singhvi in requesting the Court’s attention to the matter.

However, the CJI swiftly responded, reprimanding the move to mention the matter informally, saying, “Why are you mentioning it when there is a system? There is a system in place....I will get the letter in the afternoon; I will do the needful.”

He further clarified that all urgent matters, including the petition in question, would be placed before him later in the day, and the appropriate listing date would be assigned accordingly.

While the Senior Advocates noted that they were “just mentioning” the matter without pressing for any immediate relief, the CJI maintained that due process must be followed for listing and urgent hearing requests.

Advocate Nizam Pasha also mentioned the petition filed by Lok Sabha MP Asaduddin Owaisi.

So far, Petitions have been filed challenging the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025 by:

1. Mohd. Jawed (Congress)

2. Asaduddin Owaisi (AIMIM)

3. Mmanatullah Khan (AAP)

4. Association For Protection of Civil Rights (NGO)

5. Maulana Arshad Madani (Head of Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind)

6. Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema (Muslim organisation from Kerala)

7. Anjum Kadari

Association For Protection of Civil Rights Petition

The petition filed through AoR Adeel Ahmed challenged the constitutional validity of the Unified Waqf Management Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development Bill, 2025, commonly referred to as the UMEED Bill. The petitioner, invoking Article 32 read with Article 142 of the Constitution, has sought the indulgence of the apex court to strike down the legislation, calling it a grave assault on religious freedom, minority rights, and property protections.

According to the petition, the UMEED Bill directly violates Articles 14 (equality before law), 25 and 26 (freedom of religion), and 300A (right to property), in addition to undermining the secular and democratic values enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution. The petition raises strong objections to the manner in which the Bill was processed and passed in Parliament. It was cleared by the Lok Sabha on April 3, 2025, and passed in the Rajya Sabha the very next day, on April 4, 2025. The petitioner alleges that the Bill was rushed through without adequate debate or stakeholder consultation, and is now on the verge of receiving Presidential assent.

Calling the proposed overhaul "alarming interference into the religious affairs of the Muslim community", the petitioner contends that the existing Waqf Act, 1995, already provides a comprehensive legal structure for managing and administering Waqf properties, as affirmed by prior rulings of the Supreme Court.

The petitioner particularly flags the insertion of Section 40 in the UMEED Bill, which is claimed to undermine the principles of natural justice that were embedded in the original Waqf Act. Further, the removal of Section 3(i)(r), which upheld the long-standing Waqf by user doctrine—is termed as a "deliberate attempt to weaken legal protection" granted to Waqf properties.

Notably, the plea cites the Supreme Court's own recognition of the Waqf by user doctrine in the landmark Ayodhya verdict (M. Siddiq v. Mahant Suresh Das) to argue that the omission reflects a retreat from constitutional safeguards and judicially accepted principles.

"The petitioner humbly submits that the UMEED Bill, 2025, is an unconstitutional and unjustified legislative overreach that must be struck down in the interest of upholding the fundamental rights, Individual freedom and religious autonomy guaranteed under the Constitution of India," the petition reads.

Anjum Kadari's Petition

The petition filed through AoR Sanjeev Malhotra challenges the constitutionality of the Unified Waqf Management Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development Bill, 2025, recently passed by both Houses of Parliament. The petition, filed under Article 32 read with Article 142 of the Constitution, alleges that the Waqf Amendment Bill, 2025, infringes upon the fundamental rights and constitutional protections guaranteed to citizens, particularly those belonging to the Muslim community.

The petitioner contends that the amendments to the Waqf Act, 1995, violate Articles 14 (right to equality), 15 (prohibition of discrimination), 19 (freedom of speech and expression), 21 (right to life and personal liberty), 25 and 26 (freedom of religion), 29 and 30 (cultural and educational rights of minorities), and Article 300-A (right to property) of the Constitution.

According to the petition, Waqf, defined as a property transferred to Allah, has long been governed through legal frameworks such as the Mussalman Waqf Validating Act, 1913, the Waqf Act of 1954, and later, the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 1995, which introduced stronger administrative mechanisms via State Waqf Boards. In 2013, further amendments were introduced to improve transparency and enforcement.

However, the present Bill, introduced in August 2024, has drawn widespread criticism. The petitioner alleges that the Joint Parliamentary Committee, which reviewed the Bill ignored the opinions of key stakeholders, including minority organizations. Despite objections, the Committee's report was finalized and tabled in the Lok Sabha in February 2025, and the Bill was passed in a hurried manner—first by the Lok Sabha on April 3, 2025, and then by the Rajya Sabha the very next day, April 4, 2025.

Following the passage of the Bill, thousands of protestors took to the streets on April 5, 2025, raising concerns over the erosion of minority rights and alleged arbitrary executive interference in religious and charitable institutions.

The petition alleges that the Amendment Bill:-

- Curtails and interferes with the religious and cultural rights of the Muslim community.

- Undermines the autonomy of minorities to manage their own religious institutions.

- Enables excessive executive control, stripping the Waqf Boards of their independence.

- Was passed in haste, bypassing meaningful parliamentary debate and public consultation.

The petitioner has emphasized that India, as a secular and welfare state, cannot enforce policies that are seen as discriminatory or targeting religious practices. The Bill, according to the plea, threatens the very fabric of religious and cultural freedoms enshrined in the Constitution.

Cause Title: Association For Protection of Civil Rights v. Union of India, and Anjum Kadari v. Union of India & Ors.