Waqf (Amendment) Act SC hearing LIVE: Supreme Court to continue hearing on plea challenging Waqf Act
Countering the Supreme Court's observation that a parliamentary statute like the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 enjoys a presumption of constitutionality, petitioners on Tuesday (May 20, 2025) termed the new law a 'creeping acquisition' of waqf properties owned by the Muslim community, the largest religious minority group in India.
Also read: Waqf (Amendment) Act hearing highlights on May 20, 2025
A Bench of Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Augustine George Masih heard petitioners for a full day on their plea for an interim order to stay the implementation of the 2025 Act, which came into force on April 8.
'The 2025 amendments are a ruse to capture waqfs. Property can be acquired by the government through a legislative diktat, that too without payment of compensation, which is usual in cases of acquisition. These amendments directly encroach on a minority community's rights under Article 25 (freedom of religion),' senior advocate Kapil Sibal said.
Also read: Will the Waqf law usher in transparency?
Senior advocate A.M. Singhvi argued that this 'super-imposing' of ancient monument laws on religious waqfs would have a ripple effect on the protection given to them under the Places of Worship Act, 1991. Mr. Singhvi alleged that the government's claim of a 116% 'explosion' in waqf properties from 2013 to 2024 was intended to prejudice the court.
The Centre defended the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in the Supreme Court, saying waqf by its very nature is a 'secular concept' and can't be stayed given 'presumption of constitutionality' in its favour.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
23 minutes ago
- The Print
What Ram Vilas Paswan did to Lalu in 2005 must haunt Nitish in 2025 as Chirag enters poll fray
The LJP has said that Paswan will contest from a general, not a reserved seat. He is looking to expand his party's support base beyond the six per cent Paswan votebank. But there is more to it than meets the eye. One must go back 20 years to understand why Nitish Kumar would be wary of Paswan's moves in Bihar. So, what is he up to? He was evasive when I asked him a couple of weeks back about the speculation around him contesting the Assembly poll. His party colleagues were thinking that it would bolster the party's prospects, he said. Plausible but not very convincing. The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) is crowded in Bihar. Given that the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Janata Dal (United) are likely to contest around a hundred seats each, barely 35-40 remaining seats in the 243-member Assembly would be available for the other NDA constituents. This includes Paswan's LJP, Jitan Ram Manjhi's Hindustani Awam Morcha (HAM) and Upendra Kushwaha's Rashtriya Lok Morcha. Paswan would, of course, get a lion's share of these remaining seats, but that's still not big enough for him to harbour large ambitions and enter the poll fray. Why would a Union Cabinet minister contest an Assembly election in which his party is a marginal player and the chief ministerial chair is seemingly out of bounds? Many in Bihar political circles are looking for an answer after food processing industries minister Chirag Paswan of the Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) declared on Sunday that he would contest the upcoming Assembly election. It's not casual political bravado, for sure. Look at the way he bounced back from a hopeless political situation after the death of his father, Ram Vilas Paswan, and desertion by his uncle and other party MPs. The 42-year-old leader has a wise head on young shoulders. In the February 2005 Assembly elections, Ram Vilas Paswan ended the Lalu Yadav family's 15-year rule. Three constituents of then ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA) contested separately—the LJP, the Congress and Lalu Yadav's Rashtriya Janata Dal. Paswan senior fielded candidates against the RJD, but not against the Congress. The RJD emerged as the single largest party with 75 seats, the LJP with 29 seats, and the Congress with 10. If they came together, Lalu-Rabri's 15-year reign could have continued with the support of smaller parties. The NDA secured 92 seats. With 122 being the majority mark, Ram Vilas Paswan emerged as the kingmaker. He declared that he would join hands 'neither with the communal BJP nor with the corrupt and casteist RJD'. He said he would support a Muslim chief minister. He knew Lalu wouldn't agree. Ram Vilas forced a fresh election that brought Nitish Kumar as the CM, ending Lalu Yadav's reign. Also read: BJP has a new Muslim strategy up its sleeve. Saugat-e-Modi isn't just about Bihar election What's happening now Cut to 2020. Declaring himself as Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hanuman, Chirag Paswan went after Nitish Kumar in the Assembly election, fielding candidates in constituencies where the JD(U) was contesting. Paswan didn't field candidates against the BJP, just as his father had stayed away from constituencies contested by the Congress 20 years ago. His party won only one seat in 2020 but was instrumental in the defeat of the JD(U) candidates in three dozen seats. Nitish Kumar was smarting as the JD(U) ended up with a mere 43 seats and the BJP emerged as the big brother with 74 seats. Nitish managed to become the CM, though. Now, in 2025, Prime Minister Modi's self-proclaimed Hanuman is in his Cabinet at the Centre. Paswan and Kumar are both part of the NDA. He has often praised the CM from public platforms. But that's hardly assuring for Nitish Kumar. Only last week, Paswan shot off a letter to the Bihar CM, targeting the state administration for the gang rape and murder of a nine-year-old Dalit girl in Muzaffarpur. 'This horrific crime is not only the brutal killing of an innocent life but also highlights a deep breakdown in law and order, social consciousness, and the public health system of Bihar,' wrote Chirag Paswan. Nitish Kumar couldn't have expected a more scathing indictment of his administration even from the Opposition. So, what is Chirag Paswan up to? His declaration to contest the election has come ahead of the seat-sharing negotiations. In 2020, the LJP got more votes than the JD(U) in 32 seats. Paswan would obviously stake a claim for these seats and more. Nitish Kumar would find it difficult to assert. His party had a very poor strike rate in 2020; it could win only 43 out of 115 seats that it contested. The BJP did much better—74 out of 110. So, who should give up seats if Chirag's demand has to be accommodated? Nitish Kumar, obviously. It may or may not happen, given Kumar's indispensability for the NDA in this election. But seat-sharing is just the beginning. Think of a scenario when Nitish Kumar ends up with less than 43 MLAs in the 2025 elections, the BJP maintains its 2020 strike rate, and Chirag Paswan's party ends up with 20-odd seats. Like his Late father in 2005, Chirag would emerge as the kingmaker. Goes without saying that the LJP chief would like to end Nitish Kumar's reign, just as his father ended Lalu's. In this hypothetical scenario, Kumar would obviously threaten to return to Lalu's camp if the numbers add up and if Lalu is willing to prop him up as the CM again. There are too many ifs here. And if Lalu Yadav is not willing to oblige Kumar, the BJP, with Paswan's backing, would love to realise its long-cherished dream of having its own CM in Bihar. Let's not overlook the fact that Nitish Kumar of 2025 wouldn't be in a position to keep his flock together if the BJP were to mount an offensive. Most of the top JD(U) leaders have worked very closely with the BJP. What if Chirag Paswan also has the numbers to take the opposition mahagathbandhan's tally to the majority mark? After all, Paswan has maintained a 'brotherly' relationship with Tejashwi, too. One can argue that Paswans are usually antagonistic to the RJD's core votebank, and so, Chirag is a better fit in the NDA. He also has a Cabinet berth at the Centre. But politics is all about possibilities. At least, that's what the BJP interlocutors would tell Nitish Kumar if Chirag happens to be in a kingmaker's role. Think of all these scenarios. You can't blame Bihari politicians if they see Modi's Hanuman's tail on fire as he enters the Bihar poll fray. DK Singh is Political Editor at ThePrint. He tweets @dksingh73. Views are personal. (Edited by Theres Sudeep)
New Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Water sharing: Will Telangana attend deferred meet on Tribunal Award?
HYDERABAD: The Ministry of Jal Shakti will hold a consultation meeting on the implementation of the Brijesh Kumar Tribunal Award in Delhi on June 18. The meeting, originally proposed on May 7, was postponed due to some unavoidable reasons. According to information received here, the Jal Shakti minister will convene the meeting at 3 pm on June 18 in the national capital. Ministers of stakeholder states — Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Maharashtra — were invited to the meeting. If the Brijesh Kumar Tribunal Award is notified, it would provide immediate benefits to AP, Karnataka and Maharastra but not Telangana. According to sources, Maharashtra and Karnataka have been exerting pressure on the Centre to notify the Tribunal Award. It is not clear if the Telangana government is in favour of the consultation process initiated by the Jal Shakti Ministry and also notifying the Tribunal Award in the gazette. 'We will discuss it in the Cabinet and take a final decision on whether or not to attend the Jal Shakti meeting,' Irrigation Minister N Uttam Kumar Reddy said. It may be recalled that the Union government referred the Krishna water tribunal disputes between AP and Telangana to the existing Tribunal under Section 3 of the Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956, for the allocation of Krishna waters afresh between the two sibling states.
NDTV
27 minutes ago
- NDTV
Explained: The 1950 Act That Lets Assam Expel Foreigners Directly
Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday said the state was actively considering using a long-forgotten law from 1950 to directly expel illegal migrants without going through the courts. The law in question, the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950, empowers even a district commissioner to issue an order for the immediate removal of a person identified as an illegal immigrant. What Is The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950? The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950, was enacted by the Parliament in the early years of independence to address a pressing crisis in Assam. During the years after the Partition in 1947, Assam witnessed a massive influx of immigrants from East Bengal, which later became East Pakistan and then Bangladesh. The migration was largely driven by communal violence, displacement and the open border. To tackle this issue, the IEAA was passed on 1 March 1950. It gave the Central Government the power to remove any person or group from Assam if their presence harmed public interest or affected the rights of Scheduled Tribes. The law also allowed the government to give these powers to local officers, such as district commissioners, so they could issue expulsion orders directly, without going through the courts. The law was applicable across India but tailored to Assam. Over time, the law was mostly ignored. When the Assam Movement started in 1979, led by the All Assam Students' Union (AASU), people again raised strong concerns about illegal migration. This led to the Assam Accord in 1985, which decided that anyone who came into Assam after March 24, 1971, would be treated as a foreigner. This Act predates several key legislations that are currently used to deal with immigration issues in India, such as the Foreigners Act, 1946; Section 6A of the Citizenship Act; the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964; the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920; and the Passport Act, 1967. In October 2024, the Supreme Court of India upheld Section 6A of the Citizenship Act and clearly said that the 1950 Act was still valid. A Constitution Bench of five judges pointed out that the law allowed even a district commissioner to order the removal of illegal immigrants. The court said this Act can work alongside the Citizenship Act and the Foreigners Act to detect and deport illegal migrants. What Himanta Sarma Said "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us about [the law], and we weren't aware of it either," Mr Sarma said, as reported by The Times Of India. Now that this has come to attention, the government is seriously discussing it, he said. He added that the state had already begun preparations over the last few days to act on this provision. "This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner, we will not send them to a tribunal. We will straightaway push them back." He clarified that those who have already moved court will not be affected by this. Himanta Sarma said that the process of identifying foreigners, which had slowed down due to complications around the National Register of Citizens (NRC), will now be sped up by using the legal powers available under this old but still valid Act.
