‘Will you allow Muslims on Hindu boards?’ Supreme Court grills Modi govt over Waqf

In a powerful courtroom exchange, the Supreme Court of India on Tuesday sharply questioned the Centre over controversial changes in the Waqf Amendment Act, especially the provision that allows non-Muslims to be part of the Central Waqf Council.

The hearing was conducted by a bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, and included Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan. The court is currently hearing 73 petitions filed against the amended law, which has stirred protests in several parts of the country.

Key Questions Raised by the Court

1. Should the Petitions Be Shifted to High Courts?

Chief Justice Khanna opened the hearing by asking:

•    Should these petitions be heard by a High Court?

•    What specific constitutional questions are the petitioners raising?

Petitioners Argue Violation of Religious Freedom

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that:

•    The new law violates Article 26 of the Constitution, which protects the right to manage religious affairs.

•    Giving the Collector judicial authority under the law is unconstitutional, since the Collector represents the government.

What Is 'Waqf by User' — And Why It's Controversial

•    Sibal explained that ‘Waqf by user’ refers to properties that have long been used for religious or charitable purposes and are thus treated as Waqf, even if no written deed exists.

•    The new law removes this recognition if the property is government land or under dispute — which he said undermines centuries of Islamic tradition.

•    “If a waqf was created 3,000 years ago, they’ll ask for the deed,” Sibal remarked.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi added that nearly half of India’s 8 lakh Waqf properties (approx. 4 lakh) are based on this concept.

The Chief Justice acknowledged the complexity, noting:

“We are told the Delhi High Court is built on Waqf land. There is misuse, yes—but there are genuine Waqfs too.”

Major Flashpoint: Inclusion of Non-Muslims in Waqf Council

“Will Muslims Be on Hindu Boards? Say It Openly” — Chief Justice Asks Centre

One of the strongest moments in the hearing came when the court questioned the Centre’s move to allow non-Muslims on the Central Waqf Council.

The Chief Justice asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta:

“Are you saying you will allow Muslims to be part of Hindu endowment boards? Say it openly.”

This pointed question was aimed at highlighting perceived inconsistencies in how religious communities are treated in administrative roles concerning religious institutions.

 Centre Defends the Law

•    Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the law was thoroughly debated and passed in both Houses of Parliament after review by a Joint Parliamentary Committee.

•    However, the bench asked:

“If a ‘Waqf by user’ was validated earlier by a court, does the new law now void that?”

The court observed that ancient religious structures often have no documentation:

“You cannot undo something that has stood for centuries.”

Petitioners Request Partial Stay

•    The petitioners clarified they are not seeking to block the entire Act, only some controversial provisions.

Concern Over Rising Tensions

The Chief Justice also expressed alarm over violence and tensions triggered by the law.
“It is very disturbing,” he said.

When Mehta said “they think they can pressurize the system,” Sibal responded, “We don’t know who is pressuring whom.”

What Happens Next?
The Supreme Court will continue the hearing tomorrow. The court has emphasized that while there are cases of misuse, many Waqfs are genuine, and religious freedoms must be protected under the Constitution.

Mangaluru, Apr 10: In a profound act of generosity and faith, senior businessman and Congress leader Inayath Ali has donated 1.5 acres of prime land in the heart of Mangaluru for the construction of a Haj Bhavan. The land—strategically located just 1.5 kilometres from the Mangaluru International Airport and adjacent to a major road—is estimated to be worth over ₹8 crore.

The donation, made earlier this week, has captured public attention not just for its magnitude, but for the spirit behind it. At a time when the nation is engaged in an intense debate over the recently passed Waqf (Amendment) Act, this selfless contribution opens a new chapter in understanding the true essence of waqf.

According to sources, the upcoming Haj Bhavan will house a mosque, and offer training and orientation services for pilgrims travelling to Mecca—providing both spiritual and logistical support to hundreds of Hajj aspirants from the region.

What sets this gesture apart is the absolute surrender of rights by Inayath Ali. Despite not being a high-profile industrialist or real estate mogul, he has forfeited all claims over the land. Under Islamic waqf principles, once a property is donated, neither the donor nor their descendants can reclaim or profit from it—making it a permanent endowment for the community.

This timely development is sparking fresh conversations about the spiritual and charitable foundations of waqf, especially amid allegations and controversies surrounding waqf properties in various parts of the country. Critics often claim that waqf lands have expanded disproportionately or were historically acquired from other communities. Inayath Ali’s donation stands as a counter-narrative—one that reflects the voluntary, sacred, and socially uplifting nature of such endowments.

For generations, Muslims—from wealthy businesspersons to humble individuals—have donated land and property to build mosques, madrasas, orphanages, and cemeteries. Elders from the coastal Muslim community affirm that such acts are not merely cultural traditions but are deeply rooted in the belief that sadaqah jariyah (a continuing charity) benefits the soul in both this world and the hereafter.

Inayath Ali’s contribution, thus, is not just a donation of land—it is a message of unity, service, and spiritual vision for generations to come.

New Delhi: In the wake of the deadly terror strike in Pahalgam that claimed 26 lives, Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Friday personally reached out to the Chief Ministers of all states, instructing them to take immediate action to identify and deport Pakistani nationals who are overstaying in India beyond the newly imposed visa deadlines, according to official sources.

During the calls, Shah emphasized the urgency of locating any Pakistani nationals still residing in their respective states and ensuring their departure in compliance with the fresh directives. He also made it clear that while overstayers must be deported, Hindu Pakistani nationals holding valid long-term visas are exempt from these measures and should not face any action.

This directive follows India’s sweeping decision to revoke all visas issued to Pakistani nationals from April 27 onwards. Medical visas, however, will remain valid only until April 29. The government has also urged all Indian citizens currently in Pakistan to return home at the earliest.

Furthermore, as part of its comprehensive response to the April 22 terror incident, India has withdrawn Pakistani access to the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme (SVES). Pakistani nationals currently in India under SVES were given a 48-hour deadline—until Friday—to leave the country.

The Home Minister had just returned from a two-day visit to Jammu and Kashmir and attended a high-level Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) meeting in Delhi, where key decisions were taken, including suspending the Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan.

Meanwhile, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar and Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri briefed foreign envoys about the nature of the Pahalgam attack and the measures India is undertaking in its aftermath.

Addressing a public gathering in Bihar, Prime Minister Narendra Modi condemned the attack and asserted that India will "identify, track, and punish" every terrorist and their "backers," vowing to pursue the perpetrators to the "ends of the earth."

The government has also begun consultations with both ruling and opposition political parties, seeking unity on national security even as questions were raised regarding potential lapses that led to the attack.