Context:

The Centre has contested the claim that creating a Waqf is an essential religious practice in Islam, arguing that it is a charitable act rather than a fundamental aspect of the faith. Essential religious practices are protected by Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution.

Background:

The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 has faced legal challenges from various parties, with petitioners arguing that it infringes on the religious freedom and autonomy of the Muslim community, particularly regarding the management of waqf properties.

•  Petitioners argue that the Act restricts the religious freedom of Muslims under Article 25 of the Constitution. 
• They claim that the Act interferes with the Muslim community's right to manage their own religious affairs, as defined by Article 26. 
• The removal of "waqf by user" is seen as a significant blow to the traditional practice of waqf, where a property could be declared a waqf based on its long-standing use for religious purposes. 

About Essential Religious Practice Doctrine:

The doctrine of Essential Religious Practices serves as the constitutional yardstick to determine which aspects of a religion are protected under Articles 25 (freedom of religion) and 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs).

Judicial precedent has clarified the boundaries of ERP:

• In the Shirur Mutt Case (1954), the Supreme Court ruled that religious communities themselves—not the state—must define what constitutes an essential religious practice.
• In contrast, the Court in Durgah Committee v. Syed Hussain Ali (1961) noted that not every customary practice qualifies for protection unless it's integral to the faith.
• More recently, in the Sabarimala (2018) and Triple Talaq (2017) cases, the apex court invalidated long-followed practices that were found to be non-essential and unconstitutional.

About Waqf:

A waqf refers to the permanent dedication of movable or immovable property by a Muslim for religious, pious, or charitable purposes under Islamic law. These properties are managed by a mutawalli (caretaker or trustee) and cannot be sold or transferred once declared as waqf.

An extension of this concept is ‘waqf by user’, where a property—like a mosque or graveyard—is treated as waqf due to its long-term, open use for religious or charitable purposes, even in the absence of a written deed.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court has reserved its verdict on petitions challenging the Act. The Court's decision will determine the fate of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 and its implications for Muslim minority rights in India