The principal political parties are happy with the Supreme Court’s order on the new waqf law, but a key Muslim group is not.
While many welcomed the move as a step towards democratic accountability, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board cited unresolved constitutional concerns.
Union parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju told reporters: “I believe whatever the Supreme Court bench has decided is a very good sign for our democracy, because when any law is made in Parliament, it cannot be rejected. This is what the Supreme Court has approved today (Monday).”
Congress communications head Jairam Ramesh posted on X: “The Supreme Court’s order today on the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, represents a substantial victory not just for the parties that opposed this arbitrary law in Parliament but all those members of the Joint Parliamentary Committee who submitted detailed dissent notes which were then ignored but now stand vindicated.”
Ramesh added: “The order is an important one because it goes a long way towards undoing the mischievous intentions underlying the original statute.”
CPM general secretary M.A. Baby welcomed the order as a “partial stay” on the law. AAP parliamentarian Sanjay Singh called it a “supreme slap on the Modi government”.
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board, however, expressed disappointment. Its spokesperson, S.Q.R. Ilyas, said in a statement: “While the court has granted partial relief, it has not addressed the wider constitutional concerns, which has left us disappointed.”
All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) spokesperson Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas speaks with the media after the Supreme Court put on hold several key provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, but refused to stay the entire law, at the court complex in New Delhi.
He said many crucial provisions of the amended act that were “completely arbitrary” had not been stayed at the interim stage.
“The final decision is yet to come, but the prejudiced manner in which government functionaries work, the community feels that those provisions, (if) not stayed at this stage, shall be abused,” Ilyas added.
Hyderabad MP and All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen leader Asaduddin Owaisi, a petitioner in the case, said: “With this law, waqf properties won’t be protected, the encroachers will be rewarded, there would be no development in waqf properties.... We want the SC to make a final decision.
“The SC has not completely stayed the provision that a person has to be a practising Muslim for five years.... There is no law preventing a person of any religion from donating to another religion.... According to Article 300 of the Constitution, I can give my property to anyone I want. Then why is such a provision made for the followers of this (Islam) religion?”
Other petitioners, such as the DMK and the RJD, however, welcomed the order.
Tamil Nadu chief minister M.K. Stalin of the DMK wrote on X: “This order is a major step towards undoing the unconstitutional and illegal amendments made by the BJP government. The DMK has consistently opposed these amendments from the time the Bill was introduced in Parliament…. Today’s order strengthens the hope and trust that people place in the Hon’ble Supreme Court to safeguard the religious rights of the Muslim minority community and to uphold the Constitution.”
RJD parliamentarian Manoj Jha said: “The relief we have received today is a small defeat for tyranny in the struggle between tyranny and justice.”