New Delhi: The Supreme Court was hearing the petitions filed against the new Waqf Act for the second consecutive day. At present, the Supreme Court has not yet stayed the Waqf Act and has sought an answer from the central government within seven days on the issue. The Supreme Court has accepted the Center’s argument that it will not issue any interim order without hearing his side in the matter. But during this period, the Central Government cannot make any appointment in the Waqf Parishad or Board, nor can the user cancel the notification of Waqf property including Waqf. This move of the Supreme Court is being seen as ‘indirect obstruction’ in the implementation of the new Waqf Act.
Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K.V. Vishwanathan’s bench heard the petitions challenging the controversial new Waqf (Amendment) Act for the second consecutive day. At this time, the Supreme Court has agreed not to stop the Waqf Act at present. However, earlier on behalf of the Central Government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had assured the Supreme Court that no appointment would be made in the Waqf Council and the board. In addition, the assets already vaid by the user, including Waqf, will not be denothed and the collector will not be changed.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, “We spoke to millions of people before making this law.” The government is accountable to the public. The Waqf Board has claimed land in many villages. In such a situation, it is also necessary to keep in mind the interests of common people. Immediately prohibiting this law will be a very strong step of the court.
The Supreme Court held a hearing for an hour on the second day on Thursday. The Supreme Court has given the Central Government seven days to respond to the important provisions of the law. Applicants will have to respond within five days after the government’s reply. The next hearing will be held on May 5. The Supreme Court said that only five petitions should be filed in place of 70 petitions filed against the new Waqf Act, which will be heard. Till then the government will have to follow three guidelines.
The Supreme Court said that it is not possible to read 110 to 120 files. Only five issues should be decided which will be heard. Applicants will have to reach the consent on major issues. The Chief Justice said that the writ petitions challenging the 1995 Waqf Act and the amendments made in 2013 should be shown separately in this list. The petitioners who have filed a writ in 2025 cases have the freedom to file a response as a separate case. We will hear only five applications. The Supreme Court had prima facie the view that the three major provisions of the new Waqf Act could have serious consequences. But Solicitor General Tushar Mehta demanded a ban on the implementation of these provisions and requested the government to give some more time to respond, after which the Supreme Court did not issue an interim order on these provisions.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday indicated the possibility of stopping some provisions of the new Waqf Act. These provisions are related to inclusion of non-Muslims in the Waqf Board and the Council, a possible non-inflation of unregistered Waqf sub-use properties on government land, and not recognizing private trusts declared by court as Waqf under the new law. The central government on Thursday assured the Supreme Court that no change would be made in these provisions.
The Chief Justice said, “We don’t want the situation to change.” We do not want the current situation to change so much that it has any effect. The court is not willing to stop the sections that allow a person who has followed Muslim religion to make a vaqf for at least five years.
JPC Chairperson Jadgambika Pal’s claim
If there is any mistake in the Waqf Act, I will resign from the post of MP.
According to the Supreme Court’s decision, Waqf Board is a legal institution, not a religious institution: Jagdambika Pal
New Delhi: Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) chairman Jagdambika Pal has claimed that if a single mistake is found in the new Waqf Act, he will resign from the post of MP, amid hearing in the Supreme Court for two consecutive days in the Supreme Court.
BJP MP Jagdambika Pal said that political parties are doing vote bank politics and the politics of Muslim appeasement is not appropriate. He is not inspired by any kind of politics and is working with full impartiality. JCP has held 38 meetings on the issue and all the questions are baseless.
The petitions filed in the Supreme Court emphasize how a Hindu person can be included in the Waqf Board under the amendments. In this context, Jagdambika Pal said that the presence of non-Muslims in the Waqf Board has already been established as per the decisions of the Supreme Court. According to the Supreme Court, the Waqf Board is a legal body, not a religious institution.
If the government’s law affects the constitution, the Supreme Court can cancel it
The Supreme Court has recently stayed the Waqf Amendment Act. In the hearing of the petition filed in the Supreme Court regarding this law, the court said that the Waqf Amendment Bill cannot be implemented or any work related to it cannot be done. The question is whether the Supreme Court can cancel the bill passed by the Parliament and approved by the President on the enactment of a law? The answer is yes. The important thing is that if the constitution has been tampered with or the law is damaging constitutional rights or affecting the constitution, the Supreme Court can intervene and cancel the law if necessary. When a petition is filed against a law, the petitioner has to prove that the law violates the Constitution or tampering with the basic spirit of the Constitution and then the Supreme Court can also order the law to revoke the law.
The post The Supreme Court’s ‘indirect stay’ on the implementation of the new Waqf law first appeared on News India Live | Breaking India News, The Indian Headline, India Express News, Fast India News.
