Waqf case: Supreme Court may pass 3-point interim order after Thursday hearing | India News

NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Wednesday paused its planned interim order on the amended Waqf law after the Centre requested more time to respond to three key questions raised by the bench.
The matter will resume before the three-judge bench on Thursday at 2 PM.
The bench comprising CJI Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K V Viswanathan had earlier considered transferring the cases to a high court.
However, they proceeded to hear extensive arguments from senior counsels including Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Singhvi, Rajeev Dhavan and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre.
The top court contemplated issuing the 3-point interim order regarding petitions challenging the Waqf Amendment Act 2025 and proposed temporary directions ahead of Thursday’s hearing.

The 3-point interim order includes:

1) “Properties declared by the courts as waqfs should not be de-notified as waqfs, whether they are by waqf-by-user or waqf by deed, while the court is hearing the challenge to the Waqf Amendment Act 2025.”
“Waqf by user” refers to a practice where a property is recognised as a religious or charitable endowment (waqf) based on its long-term, uninterrupted use for such purposes, even if there isn’t a formal, written declaration of waqf by the owner.
2) The Amendment Act provision stating that a Waqf property would not be considered as Waqf during a Collector’s inquiry into government land status should not be implemented.
3) “All Members of the waqf boards and central waqf Council must be Muslims, except the ex-officio members.”
The court questioned the registration process for waqfs by user and the documentation requirements. The bench noted that whilst misuse exists, legitimate cases also need protection.
“How will you register such waqfs by user? What documents will they have? It will lead to undoing something. Yes, there is some misuse. But there are genuine ones also. I have gone through privy council judgments also. Waqf by user is recognised. If you undo it then it will be a problem. Legislature cannot declare a judgment, order or decree as void. You can only take the basis,” the bench asked.
Solicitor General Mehta indicated that numerous Muslims preferred not to be governed by the Waqf act. The court responded by questioning, “Are you saying that from now on you will allow Muslims to be part of the Hindu endowment boards? Say it openly.”
The bench stressed that historical trusts declared as waqfs cannot be arbitrarily altered. “You cannot rewrite the past,” the bench added.
Mehta noted that a joint parliamentary committee held 38 sessions and reviewed 98.2 lakh memorandums before parliamentary approval.
The Chief Justice outlined two primary considerations: “Firstly, whether we should entertain or relegate it to the high court?
Secondly, point out in brief what you are really urging and wanting to argue? We are not saying there is any bar on SC in hearing, deciding pleas against the law.”
The Centre filed a caveat in the Supreme Court, requesting that no order be passed without giving it a chance to be heard on April 8. A caveat is a legal notice filed to ensure a party is heard before any decision is made.