Waqf pleas: CJI Gavai's BIG remark, ‘courts cannot interfere unless a glaring case…’

In a big remark on the petitions challenging Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai said on Tuesday that the courts don't usually interfere with the laws as they are presumed to be Constitutional. CJI BR Gavai stated that courts would intervene only if “a glaring case” is established.

“There is a presumption of constitutionality for the statute and courts cannot interfere unless a glaring case is made out. This is what we have been taught since college.. otherwise we know what is happening,” CJI Gavai said.

Meanwhile, the Central government has urged the Supreme Court to confine the hearing on pleas challenging the validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act for passing interim orders to three issues. Also Read | Pleas against Waqf Act in SC: Once a Waqf, always a Waqf, says Kapil Sibal | All you need to know

Appearing for the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta asked the Supreme Court bench to confine the proceedings identified by the earlier bench. “The court had earmarked three issues. We had filed our response to these three issues. However, the written submissions of the petitioners now exceed several other issues. I have filed my affidavit in response to these three issues. My request is to confine it to the three issues only,” he said.

THE THREE ISSUES

One of the key issues is the authority to denotify properties that have been declared waqf—whether by court order, user, or deed.

The second issue raised by the petitioners relates to the composition of state waqf boards and the Central Waqf Council, where they contend only Muslims should operate except ex-officio members. Also Read | Violence occurring during protests against Waqf Act is 'very disturbing', says SC

The third issue relates to a provision that says a waqf property will not be treated as a waqf when the collector conducts an inquiry to ascertain if the property is government land.

The submission was, however, opposed by Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Singhvi who appeared for the petitioners.

(With agency inputs)