AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan moves SC against Waqf Bill
New Delhi, Apr 5 (PTI): Aam Aadmi Party MLA Amanatullah Khan has moved the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025.
In his plea, Khan sought that the Waqf (Amendment) Bill be declared as "unconstitutional and being violative of Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300-A of the Constitution" and sought direction for striking it down.
"The Bill violates fundamental rights enshrined under Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30, and 300-A of the Constitution. It curtails the religious and cultural autonomy of Muslims, enables arbitrary executive interference, and undermines minority rights to manage their religious and charitable institutions," Khan's plea said.
On Friday, Congress MP Mohammad Jawed and AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi moved the apex court, challenging the validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, saying it violated the constitutional provisions.
Jawed's plea alleged the Bill imposed "arbitrary restrictions" on Waqf properties and their management, undermining the religious autonomy of the Muslim community.
The petition, filed through advocate Anas Tanwir, said the proposed law discriminated against the Muslim community by "imposing restrictions that are not present in the governance of other religious endowments".
The Bill was passed in the Rajya Sabha with 128 members voting in favour and 95 opposing it. It was passed in the Lok Sabha early April 3 with 288 members supporting it and 232 against it.
Jawed, a Lok Sabha MP from Kishanganj in Bihar, was a member of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the Bill and has alleged in his plea that the Bill "introduces restrictions on the creation of Waqfs based on the duration of one's religious practice".
"Such a limitation is unfounded in Islamic law, custom or precedent and infringes upon the fundamental right to profess and practice religion under Article 25," it said.
In his separate plea, Owaisi said the Bill takes away from Waqfs various protections which were accorded to Waqfs and Hindu, Jain, and Sikh religious and charitable endowments alike.
Owaisi's plea, filed by advocate Lzafeer Ahmad, said, "This diminishing of the protection given to Waqfs while retaining them for religious and charitable endowments of other religions constitutes hostile discrimination against Muslims and is violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, which prohibit discrimination on the grounds of religion."
The plea argued the amendments "irreversibly dilute" the statutory protections afforded to Waqfs and their regulatory framework while giving "undue advantage" to other stakeholders and interest groups, undermining years of progress and pushing back Waqf management by several decades.
"Appointing non-Muslims on the Central Waqf Council and the State Waqf Boards disturbs this delicate constitutional balance and tilts it to the detriment of the right of Muslims as a religious group to remain in control of their Waqf properties," Owaisi said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Stray dogs case: We will play video, ask you what is humanity, SC tells petitioner
New Delhi (PTI): Responding to a petitioner in the stray dogs case who objected to some rules framed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) saying "inhuman" treatment was being meted out to them, the Supreme Court on Thursday said a video will be played in the next hearing, "asking you what is humanity".
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who is appearing in the stray dogs case, told a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta that a three-judge special bench which was scheduled to assemble on Thursday to hear the matter was cancelled.
"It will come on January 7," Justice Nath said.
Sibal said, "The problem is that the MCD, in the meantime, has framed some rules which are completely contrary.color:red;"
He urged the bench to hear the matter on Friday, saying authorities don't even have dog shelters. "It is very very inhuman what is being done," Sibal said.
Justice Mehta, in an apparent reference to the stray dog menace, said "On the next date, we will play a video for your benefit and we will ask you what is humanity," .
Sibal responded that they will also play a video to show what was happening.
"The problem is your lordships has passed an order and we respect that. But the point is, there are statutory rules," he said.
When the bench said it would consider the matter on January 7, Sibal said the authorities will implement the rules in December itself.
"They will be implementing it and they will be removing the dogs. They don't have shelters," he said.
Justice Nath said, "It is alright Mr Sibal. Let them do it, we will consider."
The bench said it would hear the matter on January 7.
On November 7, taking note of the "alarming rise" in dog bite incidents within institutional areas like educational institutions, hospitals and railway stations, the apex court directed the forthwith relocation of stray canines to designated shelters after due sterilisation and vaccination.
A three-judge special bench had also said the stray dogs so picked up shall not be released back in the place they were picked up from.
The bench had directed the authorities to ensure the removal of all cattle and other stray animals from state highways, national highways and expressways.
It had said recurrence of dog bite incidents within institutional areas, including sports complexes, reflected not only administrative apathy but also a "systemic failure" to secure these premises from preventable hazards.
The top court had passed a slew of directions in the suo motu case over the stray dog menace.
It is hearing a suo motu case, initiated on July 28 over a media report on stray dog bites leading to rabies, particularly among children, in the national capital.
