"Why challenge 1995 Act in 2025?", Supreme Court asks on plea against Waqf Act

The Supreme Court of India has today issued notice in a PIL by Nikhil Upadhyay, son of Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 3(r), 4, 5, 6(1), 7(1), 8, 28, 29, 33, 36, 41, 52, 83, 85, 89, 101 of the Waqf Act 1995 as amended by the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025.

Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, at the outset, questioned Advocate Upadhyay as to why he was challenging an act of 1995 in 2025.

"This court is hearing challenge to Places of Worship Act of 1991..Minorities Act..", Advocate Upadhyay said in response.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati later appeared before court to clarify that the PIL was challenging the earlier Act, not the amendment provisions.

The instant PIL submits that impugned Act is made to administer the properties of Muslims but there are no similar laws for followers of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Judaism, Bahaism, Zoroastrianism and Christianity which makes it totally against the Secularism, Unity and Integrity of the nation.

"Waqf is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. However, if the Act is enacted to secure fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 25-26, then it must be in consonance with Articles 14-15. If the Act has been made under Entry-10 and Entry-28 of the List-3 of the Schedule-7, then it must be Gender-Neutral Religion Neutral. If the impugned Act has been made to protect the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 29-30 then it has to cover all minorities i.e., followers of Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Judaism, Bahaism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity and not only Muslims", the PIL submits.

It has been further argued that Wakf Board claims to control a huge chunk of movable-immovable properties, but, in most of the cases, without sufficient and credible evidence and without following the due process of Law.

Wakf Act 1995 is operating like external Muslim invaders looting properties of other communities in a conquest, the PIL submits.

"When the Waqf based on the extant law makes inroads into the property rights belonging to members of non-Muslims or into their religious places, it breaches Articles 25, 26, 29, 300 A. It is manifestly arbitrary and discriminates in a hostile manner and breaches Articles 14-15. Therefore, separate treatment of Muslim Trust and Endowments called Waqf should be undone immediately", it adds.

Case Title: Nikhil Upadhyay vs. Union of India & Ors