The Supreme Court's decision asking the Centre not to denotify waqf properties registered under the 1995 Waqf Act till May 5 received mixed reactions from political leaders.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi, senior counsel and Congress leader, who was present at the Supreme Court during the hearing said, “I want to say this is not reform. It is retaliation in the guise of reform. Retaliation meticulously scripted, strategically timed, and constitutionally questionable. The Waqf Amendment Act is not an exercise in efficiency as it pretends to be. It is an exercise in erasure.”
“Behind the bland language of governance lies the bold ambition of control. Religious autonomy is being reduced to state-administered protocol. And community rights are being redrawn with bureaucratic pens. This is not about improving institutions but about infiltrating, controlling, and closing them,” the Congress leader said.
Singhvi said the amendment was an assault on identity, autonomy and constitutional values.
“A board with a token Muslim representation is another form of appropriation. It's not about minorities called Muslims—it's about a message that minority institutions are fair game for state takeover,” said Singhvi.
AAP leader Amanatullah Khan said, "We were here at the Supreme Court as petitioners. We are grateful to the Supreme Court for its historic decision in our favour. The government itself said that no amendments will be made in 'Waqf by user', it will remain as it is."
AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi maintained his stand: "The Supreme Court has said that the Central Waqf Council and the State Waqf Board will not be constituted, and 'Waqf by user' cannot be deleted. During the deliberations of the Joint Working Committee, I have given a report opposing all amendments proposed by the government, and during the debate in the Parliament on the bill, I have called it (bill) unconstitutional. Our legal battle against this Act will continue."
PDP president Mehbooba Mufti invoked past judgments to express distrust. "When the decision of Babri Masjid came. there was no evidence. Similarly, when the decision on Afzal Guru came, there was no evidence, but the Supreme Court said we are giving this decision for collective consciousness. So, I hope the emotions of crores of Muslims are attached to Waqf. There is evidence too. Our case is strong; PDP has also filed a petition. We hope that the Supreme Court will give a verdict against the Waqf amendments considering the same collective consciousness."
Samajwadi Party MP Zia ur Rahman Barq said, "After today's decisions, we are now seeing a ray of hope. The honourable Supreme Court has ordered stay and given a week's time. We will try that in the next hearing, the honourable Supreme Court hears the point that we have kept and grants us more relief."
All India Muslim Personal Law Board spokesperson Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas called the order “a big relief.”
"The Supreme Court has given two decisions today. The first decision is that there will be change in the status of properties used, notified as Waqf. This is a very big relief. We were apprehensive that we will lose several properties through the rider of Waqf by the user that they had imposed. The second decision is that the amendment regarding the Central Waqf Council and Waqf Board will not be implemented. These are the two orders by the Supreme Court today, but I believe the first order is a big one," Ilyas said.
Congress leader Imran Pratapgarhi said, "I am thankful to the Supreme Court for the interim relief. The Court raised almost all the issues that we raised in the parliament. Today's ruling shows that this law has been made against the Constitution. It's a win for the Constitution and not any side. In the days to come, the Court will provide more relief and will stop the government's conspiracy to grab the land."
Revolutionary Socialist Party MP NK Premachandran added, "The Supreme Court is examining the constitutional validity of the Waqf Act. Observations of the Supreme Court are giving hope to all the people because the intent and cardinal points have already been taken into consideration."
Petitioner Daya Singh raised concerns about communal tension. "If the government wanted to give common Muslim representation in Waqf then they should have made the Act on the basis of the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee and Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee. However, they are trying to polarise Hindu with the Waqf Act. We have come forward to stop their attempt at polarisation."
But the ruling BJP hit back, defending the legislation as a crackdown on mismanagement and alleged loot of the Waqf properties.
Union minister Anurag Thakur said, "It is very clear that a few people have taken control of assets worth two lakh crore rupees. Some leaders, in collaboration, even sold cemetery lands to build malls. Others permitted the construction of a 5-star hotel for just twelve hundred rupees. This open loot, which was happening under the name of 'Waqf,' is now being stopped. However, the benefits of these lands will now go to Muslim women, widows, girls, children, educational centers, healthcare centers, and in the form of their assistance. This is our commitment, and we will make it happen."
BJP MP Jagdambika Pal also took aim at the petitioners.
“Yesterday, the lawyers of the petitioner were trying to pressure for an interim order. But, they were not explaining it on the basis of law, they said protests are going on over the issue. The government side lawyer explained in detail that these issues raised by petitioners had already been addressed during the Joint Parliamentary Committee meeting. After hearing the arguments, the Supreme Court gave 7 days to the Government of India and other petitioners. We welcome this decision,” Pal said.