Congress, Jamiat factions, AIMIM, AAP and PDP are hopeful that the court would strike down the law in its entirety
NEW DELHI — Political and community leaders have offered mixed reactions to the Supreme Court’s interim order on the Waqf legislation. Almost all the 73 organisations and individuals who challenged the constitutionality of the Act in the apex court expressed hope that the court would decisively strike it down.
The court on Thursday declined to order an interim stay on the law, but issued significant directions to safeguard Waqf properties across the country.
Congress general secretary and MP KC Venugopal, in a post on his X handle, underlined that the court’s observations have brought into sharp focus the very apprehensions raised by the INDIA bloc parties in and outside Parliament.
The court observations “have opened the space for a broader and necessary debate on the legitimate concerns surrounding this hastily enacted legislation — concerns that were neither adequately addressed during the JPC deliberations nor after the lengthy discussion inside and outside Parliament,” he said.
The Supreme Court’s observations on the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025 have brought into sharp focus the very apprehensions raised by the INDIA parties inside and outside Parliament.
— K C Venugopal (@kcvenugopalmp) April 17, 2025
They have opened the space for a broader and necessary debate on the legitimate concerns surrounding…
The court’s pointed remarks, he added, raise serious constitutional questions about the Act’s infringement on fundamental rights and lay bare its divisive undercurrents.
“The fight to defend the idea of India — inclusive, plural, and just — will continue, in the courts and with the people,” he concluded.
The party said the Act was not aimed at improving but at “infiltrating” and “controlling” the institutions.
Addressing a press conference at the AICC office here, Chairman of the Law, Human Rights and RTI Department in the AICC and MP Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi and senior party leader and MP Imran Pratapgarhi said, “we are extremely grateful to the Supreme Court for having spent considerable time and passed an interim order which will of course be subject to further hearing”.
Dr Singhvi tore into the government’s claims of reform, saying, “it is retaliation in the guise of the reform. It is retaliation meticulously scripted, strategically timed and constitutionally questionable”.
The Waqf Amendment Act, the senior Supreme Court lawyer said, is not an exercise in efficiency as it pretends to be. “It is an exercise in eraser behind the bland language of governance lies, the bold ambition of control where religious autonomy is being reduced to state-administered protocol and community rights are being redrawn with bureaucratic pens”, he added.
Dr Singhvi asserted that the “Waqf Amendment Act is not an amendment, it is an assault on autonomy, on identity, on constitutional values. You cannot amputate Article 26 and call it administrative efficiency”.
Putting up a strong case against the Waqf Amendment Act, the eminent lawyer warned, “today it is the Waqf, tomorrow it could be your shrine, your institution and even your voice”.
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind (Mahmood Madani faction) expressed the hope that in its final judgment, the court will decisively strike down the law. It reiterated that the legislation poses a serious and unprecedented threat to the sanctity and integrity of Waqf properties. “Its underlying intent appears to be the systematic dilution of Waqf identity and an open door to unlawful encroachments,” Maulana Mahmood Madani said in a statement.
He further emphasised that the provisions in the Act are deeply flawed and incompatible with constitutional guarantees.
In its order, the court made it clear that no Waqf property, whether registered or deemed as Waqf by user, shall be altered in any manner, and all such properties must retain their current legal status until further orders. The court also directed that no appointments shall be made under the new provisions of the Act until the next hearing, scheduled for May 5.
Appearing on behalf of the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta requested a week to file the Union’s preliminary reply and supporting documents. The court granted this request.
Imran Pratapgarhi pointed out the government had bulldozed the law in the parliament after ignoring the suggestions made by opposition members in the JPC and also during the debate in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.
AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi called the Act “unconstitutional.” Speaking to the press, Owaisi highlighted that he had opposed the amendments both during the JPC deliberations and in Parliament. He welcomed the court’s observation that the Central and State Waqf Councils would not be reconstituted for now, and that properties identified as Waqf by user or declaration would not be denotified.
Aam Aadmi Party leader and former chairman of the Delhi Waqf Board, Amanatullah Khan, described the court’s decision as “historic”.
People’s Democratic Party (PDP) chief Mehbooba Mufti hailed the Supreme Court’sobservations. “When the decision of Babri Masjid came… There was no evidence. Similarly, when a decision on Afzal Guru came, there was no evidence, but the Supreme Court said we are giving this decision for the collective consciousness. So, I hope… emotions of crores of Muslims are attached to Waqf. There is evidence too… our case is strong,” she said.
She hoped that the court would give a verdict against the Waqf amendments, considering the same “collective consciousness.”
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind (Arshad Madani faction) also expressed satisfaction and great happiness over Thursday’s legal progress. He stated that the points in the new law to which his organisation “had strong objections —and which are extremely harmful to Waqf properties — were the very points on which the lawyers focused their full arguments.”
Maulana Arshad Madani expressed his gratitude to the lawyers who presented well-prepared and reasoned arguments in the court.
Former Member of Parliament and Chairman of Indian Muslim for Civil Rights (IMCR), Mohammad Adeeb, also expressed optimism that the Supreme Court will grant relief during the upcoming hearing. Adeeb also filed a petition on behalf the ICMR.
He emphasised once more how totally unlawful this law is. According to Mohammad Adeeb, the Maulana Azad Foundation should resume offering scholarships to Muslim students if the Union government is truly concerned about impoverished Muslims. He cautioned the BJP government against inciting anti-Muslim feeling since it would not benefit the nation.
Muhammad Ali Shabbir, another IMCR petitioner and Telangana government advisor, stated that the Union government’s choice to pass the waqf law was completely inappropriate. He claimed that Telangana’s Muslims are now far better to Muslims in other states in every way since the state’s Congress government set aside 4% of the reservation for Muslims in the state.
