The DMK and Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi on Monday challenged the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.
Till now more than 10 petitions have been filed in the top court challenging the validity of the Act
The ruling party Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) in Tamil Nadu and Pratapgarhi are added to the growing numbers of petitioners, including AIMIM president Assauddin Owaisi, Congress MP Mohammad Jawed apart from the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, who have moved against the newly-enacted law.
The DMK moved the top court through its deputy general secretary A Raja and said in a press release, "Despite widespread opposition, the Waqf Amendment Bill, 2025 was passed by the union government without proper consideration of the objections raised by the members of the JPC and the other stakeholders."
The party said the immediate implementation of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 infringes and prejudices the rights of about 50 lakh Muslims in Tamil Nadu and 20 crore Muslims in the other parts of the country.
Earlier in the day, a bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan agreed to consider, listing for an urgent hearing, the plea of Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi and others, including Congress MP Mohammad Jawed and AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan on the issue.
{{/usCountry}}Earlier in the day, a bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan agreed to consider, listing for an urgent hearing, the plea of Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi and others, including Congress MP Mohammad Jawed and AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan on the issue.
{{/usCountry}}Also Read: SC grants Congress lawmaker Imran Pratapgarhi protection from arrest
President Droupadi Murmu on April 5 gave her assent to the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which was passed by Parliament after heated debates in both houses.
The AIMPLB filed the plea in the top court late April 6.
In a press statement, SQR Ilyas, the AIMPLB spokesperson, said the petition strongly objected to the amendments passed by Parliament for being "arbitrary, discriminatory and based on exclusion".
The amendments, it said, not only violated the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India but also clearly revealed the government's intention to take complete control over the administration of Waqf, therefore, sidelining the Muslim minority from managing their own religious endowments.
Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution ensure freedom of conscience, the right to practice, propagate religion, and the right to establish and manage institutions for religious and charitable purposes, it said.
Plea is settled by advocate M R Shamshad
The plea is settled by advocate M R Shamshad, with advocate-on-record Talha Abdul Rahman representing the Muslim personal law board, through its General Secretary Maulana Fazlur Raheem Mujaddidi.
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind also filed a petition in the apex court, claiming it was a "dangerous conspiracy" to strip Muslims of their religious freedom.
In its petition, Jamiat said the law was a "direct attack on the country's Constitution, which not only provides equal rights to its citizens but also grants them complete religious freedom".
In its separate plea filed in the top court, Samastha Kerala Jamiath ul Ulema, a religious organisation of Sunni Muslim scholars and clerics in Kerala, has claimed the Act was a "blatant intrusion" into the rights of a religious denomination to manage its own affairs in the matter of religion.
NGO Association for the Protection of Civil Rights also filed a petition in the apex court challenging the constitutional validity of the Act.
The bill was passed in the Rajya Sabha with 128 members voting in favour and 95 opposing it. It was cleared by the Lok Sabha with 288 members supporting it and 232 against it.
AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan sought the law declared as unconstitutional, being violative of "Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300-A of the Constitution".