Waqf Amendment Act 2025 Partially Blocked: SC Stays Mandatory 5-Year Muslim Practice Clause Amid Challenges

The existence and purpose of the Act: Waqf (amendment) Bill, 2025, is designed to solve the problems in the management of Waqf properties. It will enhance transparency, accountability, and administration. It also aims at incorporating other groups such as non-Muslims into Waqf boards.
Whilst there are several specific provisions that are being challenged, in the Supreme Court, the most notable ones will be the mandatory 5-year Muslim practice clause, the clause that gives district collectors authority to determine a dispute over Waqf property and the amendments made to the composition of the Waqf boards.

The act by the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court has stayed, at least in part, the act, that is, the part that demanded that one had practiced Islam over a period of five years to form a Waqf. The court has said that this provision cannot be enforced before a mechanism to ascertain this is put in place. The court also has stayed the provisions which are giving excessive powers to the collectors and has placed a cap on the number of non-Muslims in the boards.
Reasoning behind the court decision: The line of reasoning behind the decision of the court is based on the fact that these stayed provisions, may result in arbitrary power and failure to separate powers. The court has not however granted the stay of the whole act in view of the fact that there is a long history of mismanagement of Waqf properties and that there is the necessity to reform the same.

The prompt given to the user is self-enclosed and gives one a clear narrative of an imaginary event. The search outcomes are consistent with this story and give enough details to form a realistic and well-informed article based on the assumption. Now I am able to write the 1000-word article as it has been ordered with the help of the information that I have found in my search to develop the given headline. I do not have to conduct any further search. This is all the information that would satisfy the request of the user.A Supreme Court case is underway in India, with the court intervening to temporarily block major provisions of the newWaqf Amendment Act 2025. This half stay has been an important find particularly on a provision that rendered it obligatory that persons demonstrate five years of uninterrupted Muslim practice prior to committing property as a Waqf.

The ruling of the court is based on much opposition to the new legislation, which seeks to revamp the administration of millions of acres of Waqf holdings in the country. It has been a controversial ruling and most people have rejoiced at the judicial intervention whereas others have said that the judicial ruling is a derailment of the government initiative to introduce transparency in the administration of Waqf. Such a case of law points out the tense and contradictory relation between the law and religious practices and the relations between property rights and religious practices in India today.

The official intention of the government in presenting the Waqf Amendment Act 2025 Act was to correct old issues in the government management of Waqf properties. Land grabbing, corruption and misappropriation of funds have been a large issue of concern over the decades.

The government was interested in establishing a more compact and open system whereby they hoped to make sure that the revenue generated by such properties is utilized in the charitable and religious reasons they were created. A major number of reforms were brought into the new law such as the introduction of a centralized digital portal to trace the properties and inclusion of the non-Muslim members in the Waqf boards which was aimed at making the boards more representative and efficient. It was considered that more inclusive and technologically driven model would result in preventing the exploitation of such precious resources which are to serve the interests of the Muslim community.

The controversial five year clause.

The new law included a clause that led to the creation of a new Waqf that required one to have practiced the Muslim faith at least five years. This is one of the clauses added to avoid fraud and misuse, which turned out to be the focal point of the legal challenges. The petitioners claimed that this was an arbitrary requirement that infringed the basic rights of the person such as the freedom of religion. They asserted that it was some sort of a religious policing, which could result in harassment and unwarranted use of law.

The provision, according to them, posed a drawback to Muslims who might not be hardcore believers according to the religious practices, yet, they still want to give away their property to charity. Many people considered this test of faith a dangerous precedent that could lead to the state intrusion into the individual religious affairs.

In its interim order, the Supreme Court discovered that this five-year practice provision was troublesome. The court argued that there was no explicit process that was stipulated in the legislation that could be used to establish or confirm whether an individual had practiced the Muslim religion in the past five years. The provision may be abused in the absence of a proper and fair process giving rise to arbitrary decisions and legal wrangles.

The court further noted that the clause was not necessary in the overall intention of the law and that is to provide improved management of properties. In keeping this particular provision, the Supreme Court has made a very big statement that any legal reform, even with good intentions involved should not in any way interfere with the fundamental rights of the people. It emphasized the relevance of clear, fair and non-discriminatory procedures that any law has in place in order to implement it successfully.