Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025: Reform, Rights and the Role of the Supreme Court

INTRODUCTION

Significant constitutional discussions have been sparked throughout India by the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. While some view the amendment as the move towards openness, others see it as an assault on religious autonomy. The amendment aims to modernize the oversight and management of waqf properties. The new rule has raised important questions about property rights, religious freedom and government meddling in religious endowments, and the Supreme Court is currently considering many petitions contesting its legality.

This blog explores the contents of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, the legal obstacles it confronts and the potential constitutional impacts for India’s secular structure.

UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF WAQF

According to Islamic law, a waqf is a Muslim permanent donation of movable or immobile property for a religious, pious or charitable purpose. Following the creation of a waqf, God becomes the legal owner of the property, and the funds are allocated to the specified charity cause.

The Waqf Act, 1995, which created State Waqf Boards and Central Waqf Council to supervise the management, registration, and oversight of waqf assets, governs the administration of waqf holdings in India.

But overtime, calls for change have been sparked by allegations of corruption, encroachment and poor management in Waqf Boards. These issues were addressed by the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, however it has also raised grave concerns about the government’s excessive interference in religious organisation.

KEY PROVISIONS OF THE WAQF (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2025

The modification made a number of procedural and structural adjustments to the current legislation. Among the prominent characteristics are: -

1-Greater government oversight – The amendment gives the central government more authority to instruct State Waqf Boards and exert more supervision over the Central Waqf Council’s operations.

2- Board composition changes – It reduces the dominance of community- based representatives by increasing the participation of administrative officers and government nominees on Waqf Boards.

3- Centralised audits and record keeping – The creation of a nationwide digital database of waqf properties is planned, along with required audits to guarantee accountability.

4- Mechanism for dispute resolution – The amendment creates a more stringent structure, including clauses for the swift eviction of encroachers, for settling disagreements over who own waqf property.

5- Accountability and penalties – To discourage corruption and carelessness, harsher sanctions are implemented for misusing or stealing waqf monies.

THE LEGAL CHALLENGE BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court of India receives several applications shortly after the act went into force, claiming that the amendments infringed upon basic rights guaranteed by Article 25 (freedom of religion) and 26 (freedom to govern religious affairs) of the constitution.

The petitioners argued that: -

1-The Act gives the government undue administrative power undermining the independence of religious organisation.

2- It undercuts the community’s authority to oversee its own religious property and charitable endowments.

3- It might let the government to meddle in matters that are solely religious, which would go against the constitution’s secular nature.

The Waqf (Amendment) Act was partially delayed by an interim decision given by the Supreme Court on September 15, 2025, however the statute was not completely stayed. The court noted that although accountability and transparency are valid state interests, basic rights cannot be sacrificed for them.

The case is now anticipated to be thoroughly examined by a constitution bench, making it one of the year’s most carefully followed court cases.

 

CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES INVOLVED

A number of significant constitutional issues are brought up by the Waqf (Amendment) Act, including:

1-Article 25 – Freedom of religion:

Does greater government supervision qualify as interference with religious practise? The freedom to profess and practise one’s religion is guaranteed under Article 25, although it is contingent upon public order, morality and health. Although the state may control secular facets of religion, it is still controversial to draw a distinction between what is “religious” and what is “secular”.

2-Article 26 – Right to manage religious affairs:

Religious denominations are entitled to run their own affairs, including those pertaining to property and religion. Opponents contend that by consolidating administrative authority under the government, the Waqf Amendment violates this right.

3- Doctrine of Reasonable Restriction:

To maintain public order or stop property abuse, the state may impose reasonable limits. The acts supporters contend that in order to prevent widespread corruption and safeguard waqf assets from infringement, government control is needed.

4- The principle of secularism:

India’s secularism enables the government to be impartial towards all faiths. The question is whether this amendment goes too far in the direction of control rather than regulation.

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF THE AMENDMENT

1-Accountability and transparency - Mismanagement has Long been an issue with hundreds of work properties worth billions of rupees spread throughout India. Clear records, digital transparency and accountability systems are the goals of the amendment.

2- Preventing encroachment - A large number of Waqf lands have been occupied without permission. Recovering and safeguarding religious assets may be made easier but the new rules requiring more stringent eviction and record keeping.

3- Administration monetization - By centralising audits and record- keeping waqf board operations can become more efficient and less bureaucratic.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE AMENDMENT

1-Loss of religious autonomy - Scholars and community leaders contend that the law compromises the self -governing character of religious trusts by directly granting the government authority over waqf boards.

2- Possibility of political interference - More administrative authority can provide governing bodies more sway over decisions and appointments made by religious organisation.

3- Violation of fundamental rights - By limiting religious communities’ autonomy to run their businesses, critics claim that the act infringes against Article 25 and 26.

SUPREME COURTS INTERIM OBSERVATIONS

The Supreme Court struck a careful balance in its interim order. It stated that religious freedom cannot protect corruption and openness cannot excuse excess. The court said it will look attentively at:

→If the provisions go beyond what the state can regulate.

→If they influence upon religious freedom and secularism in variation of the basic structural theory.

→If there are sufficient protections against abuse of state authority.

The Act is still partially in effect pending the ultimate decision, and the public and judicial are alternatively watching how it is being implemented.

CONCLUSION

At this intersection of governance, religion and the law is the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. How the Supreme Court balances the state’s obligation to maintain accountability with the constitutional provision of religious autonomy will determine its future.

If sustained the rule might serve as the model for governing religious assets in other communities, igniting discussions about comparable changes to Christian and Hindu trusts. If overturned, it might serve as a reminder of the boundary of state authority over place of worship.

In any event the case highlights the fine balance that India’s constitutional structure needs to preserve between rights and reforms justice and faith and religion and the rule of law.

The purpose of this blog was to clarify and simplify the Waqf Act 2025 and its practical effects on India's social and legal structure. If it was useful to you, check back here on Law Vibes Blog for more clear updates and case discussions.