The Kerala government has approached the Supreme Court seeking to intervene in a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The state has expressed serious concerns that the recent amendments infringe upon the fundamental rights of its Muslim population and significantly deviate from the scope and intent of the original Waqf Act, 1995.
In its intervention application, Kerala argued that the Muslim community, which holds substantial waqf properties in the state, has a “genuine apprehension” that the 2025 amendment alters the legal character of these properties and undermines their constitutionally protected right to manage religious affairs. “The apprehension of the Muslim minority in Kerala that they are discriminated against in the matter of right to manage religious affairs, the waqf and waqf properties is genuine,” the state’s plea noted, calling several provisions of the amendment “highly unjust” and of “doubtful” constitutional validity.
A Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih is scheduled to hear the batch of pleas on Tuesday. The petitions before the court question the legality of the amended provisions, citing violations of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution which protect the freedom of religion and the management of religious affairs.
The Centre, through the Ministry of Minority Affairs, has defended the amendment in a voluminous 1,332-page affidavit submitted on April 25. It opposed any “blanket stay” on the operation of the Act, stating that the legislation carries the “presumption of constitutionality” as it was duly passed by Parliament and received Presidential assent on April 5.
Calling the controversy a result of a “mischievous false narrative” around certain provisions, the Centre urged the top court to dismiss the challenges against the amendment in their entirety.
The Supreme Court’s decision on whether to admit Kerala’s intervention could have significant implications for the ongoing litigation, especially with several states and religious bodies closely monitoring the case.
