The Indian top court remains key provisions of the new law governing Muslim properties

The best court in India has remained key provisions of a controversial law that seeks to change the way the property donated by Muslims and the value of billions of dollars are managed, but declined to reflect the law completely.

The court listened to petitions from Muslim groups and opposition parties against the WAQF Act (amendment) 2025 adopted by Parliament in April.

Petitioners say the law violates the rights of the Muslim community. But the government claims it aims to manage Muslim properties known as WAQF more transparent.

In Islam, WAQF is a charity or religious donation made by Muslims of mosques, madrasies or orphanages. Such properties cannot be sold or used for any other purpose.

Properties are managed by the WAQF Act of 1995, which necessitates the formation of WAQF state councils for their management.

The new law introduced by the ruling government, led by the Bharatiy Party Party, amended the Law on Adding New Provisions, including changes in how the WAQF ownership is determined.

On Monday, India’s Chief Judge Br Gavai and Justice AG Masih refused to reflect the whole law, saying that “the provision of a stay is only in the most rare category.”

However, this stopped a controversial provision that allowed the government to determine whether or not the disputed property was WAQF.

Historically, many properties that have been donated by oral declarations or customs of the Community have been legitimized as WAQF property due to their continuous use by the Muslim community.

Government data show that out of 872 852 properties WAQF in India (on paper), at least 13,200 are entangled in legal battles, 58 889 have been visited and more than 436,000 have an unclear status.

Under the new law, WAQF tips were required to provide valid property request documents such as WAQF. In the event of dispute, the final decision rests on the government.

The Court found that the authorization’s authorization to determine the rights of a citizen was against the division of the powers between the executive power and the judiciary, a mandate under the Indian Constitution.

Another controversial provision that was defective was a clause that required a WAQF donor to be a Muslim practitioner for at least five years.

Currently, WAQF properties are managed by the state level and Central Council councils, with candidates from the government of the state, Muslim MPs, members of the State Bar Council, Islamic scientists and the heads of these properties.

While the judges refused to remain a provision that allows non -Muslim nomination on the WAQF Council, they limit the number of non -Muslim members up to four in the 22-member Federal Council and up to three in the 11-member state councils.

The court also stated that “efforts should be made to appoint the CEO of the Council to the Muslim community.”

The case came to the best court in early April, shortly after the law was passed by parliament against the background of widespread criticism by Muslim groups and opposition parties.

On May 22, the best court retained its decision after examining the case for three continuous days.

Follow BBC News India on Instagram., YouTube., X and Facebook