Highlights of the Waqf (Amendment) Act hearing: Singhvi disputes the government's assertion that waqfs have increased by 116%.

As the Supreme Court considers petitions contesting the Waqf (Amendment) Act, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi challenges the Center's assertion of a 116% increase in waqf properties. More than 100 petitioners claim that the revisions violate the rights of minorities.

The Supreme Court of India commenced hearing on the group of petitions contesting the Waqf (Amendment) Act, which is a noteworthy legal event. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi gave a compelling argument throughout the hearing, vehemently disputing the government's claim of a "116% explosion" in waqf properties in recent years. In an earlier defense of the contentious revisions, the administration claimed that the number of waqf properties had increased by an astounding 116%. Singhvi, speaking on behalf of a number of petitioners, questioned the veracity and purpose of this assertion, describing it as "misleading" and "highly exaggerated." Context: The Waqf (Amendment) Act: What is it? In order to implement modifications to the regulation and administration of waqf properties throughout India, the Waqf (Amendment) Act was passed. Waqf Boards, which are overseen by the federal and state governments, are in charge of Waqf holdings, which are endowments created by Muslims for religious or charitable reasons. The petitioners contend that the proposed changes give the Waqf Boards broad authority, including the capacity to designate land as waqf property without conducting a thorough inquiry or consulting a lawyer. They contend that this violates citizens' fundamental rights, particularly those of the Muslim community. More than 100 Petitioners Express Concern With serious concerns that the amendments violate Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution, which protect religious freedom and the right to manage religious affairs, over 100 petitioners—including individuals, minority groups, and civil society organizations—have petitioned the highest court. They have requested a temporary halt to the implementation of the controversial measures, claiming that the modifications may result in arbitrary land acquisition and a weakening of legal protections. Important Takeaways from Singhvi's Argument during the Hearing: According to him, the government's claimed "116% increase" was not supported by clear statistics or independent confirmation. "Where is the audit? The independent report is where? Singhvi questioned the bench. Effect on Minorities: The senior attorney underlined that the revisions have a negative impact on Muslim communities' independence in running their charitable organizations and places of worship. SC's Observations: Under the leadership of Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, the Bench recognized the issue's constitutional importance and promised to investigate it thoroughly. What Comes Next? In the next hearing, the court is anticipated to decide whether to grant an interim stay on the modified provisions. According to legal experts, the decision may provide a significant precedent for legislation pertaining to religious property management and minority rights. In conclusion The Waqf (Amendment) Act hearing before the Supreme Court focuses on fundamental issues of Indian religious freedom and constitutional rights, making it more than just a legal case. The country is eagerly awaiting a decision that could change the future regulations governing waqf properties as the arguments continue.