New Delhi, May 20 (Reporter) A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih on Tuesday took for hearing a clutch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The petitioners, led by senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, have urged the court to grant an interim stay on the implementation of the new provisions, arguing that the law infringes upon fundamental religious rights. Opening arguments, senior advocate Kapil Sibal termed the 2025 amendments as a “creeping acquisition” of waqf properties by the Centre, asserting it undermines Muslims’ right to manage religious affairs. He stated that the new provisions constitute a radical departure from the waqf framework evolved over decades. Sibal further flagged a lack of due process in the inquiry mechanism to determine waqf properties. “The designated officer is a government functionary acting as judge in his own cause,” he argued, emphasizing that the waqif is allowed to approach the Waqf Tribunal only after a property is denied waqf status. He contended that the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, a secular legislation, is now being used to dilute minority rights. “If a property is declared an ancient monument, it automatically loses its waqf character,” he pointed out. Sibal argued that the new law introduces religious tests, requiring a person to prove they are a practising Muslim to dedicate property as waqf violating Article 25 of the Constitution. “Even a local authority or panchayat raising a dispute strips the property of waqf status under Section 3,” he submitted. He also highlighted the disproportionate representation of non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Council under the 2025 law, claiming that “the right to manage waqf properties is diluted as 7 out of 11 members can be non-Muslims.” Responding to the Chief Justice’s observation on the presumption of constitutionality of a parliamentary law, Sibal said failure to stay the law would cause irreparable harm, particularly when district collectors now decide if a property is waqf or government-owned. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, urged the court to limit the hearing to three specific issues as identified in the government’s affidavit that whether properties declared as waqf by courts can be denotified, the legality of waqf-by-user and Waqf-by-deed provisions. However, this approach was strongly opposed by the petitioners, who argued that the matter involves fundamental constitutional questions and must be considered in its entirety. The Kerala government, which had earlier hesitated to take a stand, has now decided to challenge the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. State Law Minister P. Rajeeve confirmed that instructions have been issued to file an impleading petition in the Supreme Court. This development adds political significance to the case, especially since multiple BJP-ruled states have supported the Centre’s stance. In its preliminary response, the Centre submitted that there had been a 116% increase in waqf lands since 2013, from 18.29 lakh acres to 39.21 lakh acres. “This unprecedented rise is unmatched even during the Mughal era,” the Centre stated, blaming misuse of waqf provisions for encroachments on private and government land. The government urged the court not to grant a blanket stay, citing the principle that a law enacted by Parliament is presumed to be constitutional...////...