The Supreme Court said it will correct a typographical mistake in its judgment on the Waqf Amendment Act order. It noted that “Paragraph 178 referenced an incorrect section,” after advocate Sneha Kalita flagged the error before the bench.
The Supreme Court has taken steps to amend a typographical error in its judgment regarding the interim stay on the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, issued on September 15.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India B R Gavai praised advocate Sneha Kalita for bringing to their attention that paragraph 178 of the judgment referenced an incorrect section.
She requested the court to rectify the genuine clerical mistake, clarifying that the section should have been cited as 3E of the amendment Act instead of 3D, as stated.
Commending the advocate’s attentiveness during an oral mentioning, the Chief Justice noted,
“You have read the judgment so closely,”
In the original judgment, paragraph 178 stated,
“Accordingly, we are of the considered view that a provision such as Section 3D of the Amended Waqf Act, which has been enacted with the avowed object of safeguarding the interest of one of the most marginalised and vulnerable sections of our country, i.e., the Scheduled Tribes cannot be said to have no nexus with the object sought to be achieved. Such a provision cannot, therefore, be said to be prima facie arbitrary so as to stay the same.”
Earlier, On 15th September, The Supreme Court permitted most of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, to stay in effect but temporarily suspended three specific provisions while ongoing petitions contest the law.
One of the provisions on hold is the stipulation that an individual must have practiced Islam for a minimum of five years to dedicate property as Waqf.
The bench also addressed the structure of Waqf boards, ruling that the number of non-Muslims on state Waqf boards and the Central Waqf Council must not exceed three.
The court emphasized that these measures were essential to safeguard certain provisions while allowing the majority of the Act to remain operational.
The final provision the court suspended was one that granted a Collector the authority to determine whether a property designated as Waqf was owned by the government.
The court noted that allowing the Collector to adjudicate citizens’ rights would breach the principle of separation of powers.
The Supreme Court was issuing its interim orders on three key issues arising from petitions challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. Central to the discussion was the power to denotify properties classified as “waqf by courts, waqf-by-user, or waqf by deed,” a contentious issue that has ignited debates in both legal and religious communities.
Earlier, On April 25, the Union Ministry of Minority Affairs submitted a comprehensive 1,332-page affidavit defending the law and opposing any blanket stay.
The bill had been the subject of vigorous discussion in Parliament, with 288 members in the Lok Sabha voting in favor and 232 against it, while 128 members supported it in the Rajya Sabha and 95 opposed it.
Click Here To Read More Reports on Waqf Amendment Bill
Case Title: IN RE THE WAQF (AMENDMENT)w ACT, 2025 (1)|W.P.(C) No. 276/2025
Read Attachment
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
