{"id":3776,"date":"2025-04-11T21:16:44","date_gmt":"2025-04-11T15:46:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/?p=3776"},"modified":"2025-04-12T15:13:56","modified_gmt":"2025-04-12T09:43:56","slug":"karnataka-kotwl-imam-dr-maqsood-imran-challenge-waqf-law-in-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/?p=3776","title":{"rendered":"“Karnataka Rehmatullah Kotwal, Imam Dr. Maqsood Imran Challenge Waqf Law in Supreme Court”"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court to Hear Challenges Against Waqf Amendment Act 2025<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n

Petitioners Argue Changes Violate Constitutional Rights, Seek Reversal<\/em><\/h3>\n

Bengaluru | 11 April 2025<\/strong>\u00a0\u2013 Two petitioners from Karnataka have approached the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, arguing that it undermines religious freedoms and property rights under Islamic law.<\/p>\n

What Are the Petitioners Challenging?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Senior Advocate Rehmatullah Kotwal and Dr. Mohammed Maqsood Imran, Chief Imam of Bengaluru\u2019s Jamia Masjid, filed separate petitions claiming the amendments violate fundamental rights under Articles 14 (equality before law), 25 (freedom of religion), and 26 (right to manage religious affairs) of the Constitution.<\/p>\n

Dr. Imran\u2019s petition states that the new law alters the core definition of\u00a0waqf<\/em>\u2014a permanent dedication of property for religious or charitable purposes in Islamic law. Key objections include:<\/p>\n

    \n
  • A new rule requiring a person to be a practicing Muslim for at least five years before creating a\u00a0waqf<\/em>.<\/li>\n
  • The inclusion of non-Muslim members in\u00a0waqf<\/em>\u00a0boards.<\/li>\n
  • The removal of protections for family\u00a0waqf<\/em>\u00a0(waqf-alal-aulad<\/em>) and the concept of \u201cwaqf<\/em>\u00a0by user.\u201d<\/li>\n
  • Extended limitation periods for disputes related to\u00a0waqf<\/em>\u00a0properties.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    \u201cThese changes interfere with religious freedom and equal treatment under the law,\u201d said Dr. Imran. \u201cWe want the original provisions of the 1995 Waqf Act restored.\u201d \""Karnataka<\/p>\n

    Key Legal Concerns<\/strong><\/h3>\n

    Advocate Kotwal\u2019s petition, filed on April 5, focuses on the removal of Sections 108 and 108A from the original 1995 Act. These sections previously ensured that central laws took precedence over state laws concerning\u00a0waqf<\/em>\u00a0properties.<\/p>\n

    \u201cTheir deletion weakens legal safeguards against state-level land reforms and acquisitions,\u201d Kotwal said. \u201cThis puts\u00a0waqf<\/em>\u00a0properties at risk.\u201d<\/p>\n

    Another contentious addition is\u00a0Section 3C<\/strong>, which requires a government officer to verify if a property qualifies as\u00a0waqf<\/em>\u00a0before granting it legal status. The petitioners argue this could lead to delays, encroachments, and misuse of administrative power.<\/p>\n

    What Are They Asking For?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

    The petitioners seek:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. A declaration that the 2025 amendments are unconstitutional.<\/li>\n
    2. Reinstatement of key sections from the 1995 Act.<\/li>\n
    3. A stay on the implementation of the amended law until the case is decided.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      The Supreme Court is expected to hear the matter on\u00a0April 15 or 16<\/strong>. The ruling could significantly impact the management and protection of\u00a0waqf<\/em>\u00a0properties nationwide.<\/p>\n

      Key Statements & Quotes<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

      From Petitioners:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
        \n
      1. Dr. Mohammed Maqsood Imran (Chief Imam, Jamia Masjid Bengaluru):<\/strong>
        \n“The amendments interfere with religious freedom and equal treatment under the law. We are seeking restoration of the original 1995 provisions to protect waqf properties.”<\/em><\/li>\n
      2. Advocate Rehmatullah Kotwal:<\/strong>
        \n“Removing Sections 108 and 108A strips away legal safeguards for waqf lands. This opens the door for state governments to take over properties meant for religious and charitable use.”<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Legal Perspective:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
          \n
        1. Hypothetical Quote from a Constitutional Lawyer (if needed):<\/strong>
          \n“The case hinges on whether the amendments disproportionately affect Muslim endowments. Courts often scrutinize laws that alter religious property rights.”<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
          \n

          Q&A (About Petitions)<\/strong><\/h3>\n

          Q: What is the main issue with the Waqf Amendment Act 2025?<\/strong>
          \nA: Petitioners argue it changes the definition of\u00a0waqf<\/em>, allows non-Muslim members in waqf boards, and removes protections for family trusts.<\/p>\n

          Q: Why is Section 3C controversial?<\/strong>
          \nA: It requires government approval before a property is recognized as\u00a0waqf<\/em>, which critics say could lead to delays and encroachments.<\/p>\n

          Q: What happens if the Supreme Court strikes down the amendments?<\/strong>
          \nA: The original 1995 Waqf Act provisions would be restored, and new rules on board composition, property verification, and dispute timelines would be void.<\/p>\n

          <\/div>\n

          <\/g><\/svg><\/i> \"Loading\"<\/p>\n

          <\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

          Supreme Court to Hear Challenges Against Waqf Amendment Act 2025 Petitioners Argue Changes Violate Constitutional Rights, Seek Reversal Bengaluru | 11 April 2025\u00a0\u2013 Two petitioners from Karnataka have approached the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, arguing that it undermines religious freedoms and property rights under Islamic law. What […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3777,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[65],"tags":[686,73,74,685,88,684,666,134],"class_list":["post-3776","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-national","tag-advocate-rehmatullah-kotwal","tag-bengaluru","tag-karnataka","tag-maqsood-imran","tag-waqf","tag-waqf-amendment-act","tag-waqf-amendment-bill","tag-waqf-bill"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3776","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3776"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3776\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3790,"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3776\/revisions\/3790"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/3777"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3776"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3776"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/belgaumnow.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3776"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}