The Supreme Court of India today stayed a key provision in the Waqf Act, 2025 which demands a person must have practised Islam for five years before they can create a waqf. A bench led by Chief Justice B. R. Gavai and Justice A. G. Masih imposed the stay until state governments set rules for how that condition is to be determined.
The provision comes under Section 3 of the Amendment Act. The stay was granted against other contested clauses as well, including one that allows a government-designated officer to decide whether a waqf property has encroached upon government land — a power the court held could violate principles of separation of powers if exercised by the executive.
The Amendment Act, passed earlier this year to update the law governing waqf endowments, introduced several reforms: mandatory registration of waqf deeds, stricter auditing, changes in waqf boards’ composition, removal of the doctrine of waqf-by-user among them. The five-year practice requirement has drawn sharp criticism from legal experts and community groups who argue it undermines religious and equality rights by putting arbitrary temporal conditions on established religious doctrine.
Arguments before the bench turned on constitutional issues such as equality before the law, freedom of religion, and whether the government can lawfully impose subjective or temporal criteria on religious practices. The petitioners contended that Islam does not prescribe such a probation period for someone to be recognised as Muslim or to practice waqf, thus making the requirement irrational under constitutional guarantees.
From the government’s side it was argued that the provision is intended to prevent misuse of waqf creation, ensure accountability, and align with Muslim Personal Law application in certain contexts. It also defended the power given to officers to adjudicate disputes over waqf encroachments, although that part was also stayed.
State governments are now expected to draft regulations clarifying how one demonstrates continuous practise of Islam for five years — what standard of proof is required, what kinds of behaviour or affiliation count. Legal observers say those rules will be critical in determining whether the requirement can be applied fairly without undue burden.
Bhagwat Says India Proved Churchill Wrong on Unity 