Today, On 16th April, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, arguing before the Supreme Court, strongly opposed the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. He said allowing a state-appointed Collector to decide if a property is waqf makes the officer a “judge in his own cause”, which is unconstitutional.
The Jammu & Kashmir National Conference, led by Farooq Abdullah, is challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, claiming it interferes unconstitutionally in Muslim religious affairs. Multiple petitions cite violations of fundamental rights and seek legal intervention from the Supreme Court, which will hear these cases.
Sheikh Noorul Hassan, a National People’s Party MLA, has filed a petition against the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in the Supreme Court, citing concerns over its impact on Islamic practices and Scheduled Tribes’ rights to donate property as Waqf. The Act has faced opposition for allegedly discriminating against Muslims and compromising their religious freedoms.
NEW DELHI: 4th April: All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi have moved the Supreme Court against the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025. The bill was passed in the Rajya Sabha with 128 votes in favor and 95 against on Thursday. Earlier, on April 3, the Lok Sabha had passed the bill with 288 members supporting it and 232 opposing it.
The High Court rejected a plea seeking permission to use loudspeakers On top of a mosque. It stated that religious places are meant for offering prayers, and the use of loudspeakers cannot be considered a fundamental right. The court emphasized maintaining peace and harmony. This ruling highlights the balance between religious practices and public order.
A plea in the Delhi High Court addresses excessive burial fees charged to Christians, highlighting unfair cemetery management practices. The petition argues these inflated costs infringe on fundamental rights, burdening grieving families. The court instructed officials to investigate, scheduling a further hearing on November 29, 2024, due to trust issues with authorities.
The Kerala High Court ruled that religious sites cannot be obstructed solely due to opposition from another community, emphasizing the importance of religious freedom in a democratic society. The court annulled a previous denial for a Muslim prayer hall, stating that minor objections do not justify restricting constitutional rights under Articles 25 and 26.