‘In Hindus, There’s Moksh’: Supreme Court Wraps Up Hearings on Waqf Act Challenge
The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. In a thought-provoking exchange during the hearing, Chief Justice BR Gavai responded to arguments about the spiritual essence of waqf by saying, “In Hindus, there’s Moksh.”
The remark came as the bench, comprising CJI BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih, concluded three days of intense hearings. The court is expected to pronounce its order on Friday.
The petitioners, represented by senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Rajeev Dhawan, argued that waqf is not merely charity but a spiritual dedication to God, rooted deeply in Islamic belief. They pushed back against the Centre’s assertion that waqf is not an essential religious practice and is comparable to general charity found in all faiths.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, had argued on Wednesday that “Waqf is an Islamic concept but not an essential part of Islam. It is just a form of charity, which is present in all religions.” Mehta cited Hinduism’s daan, Christianity’s charitable missions, and Sikhism’s seva as comparable examples.
On Thursday, CJI Gavai and Justice Masih offered their own reflections. “In Hindus, there is Moksha,” the Chief Justice noted, suggesting that spiritual goals exist across faiths. Justice Masih added, “We all try to get to heaven,” referencing similar beliefs in Christianity.
Sibal, countering the Centre’s comparison, said, “Waqf is not just charity to people, it is a dedication to God, for the afterlife, for spiritual benefit. That makes it distinct.”
Advocate Dhawan also weighed in, saying that Hinduism itself does not hinge on temple worship, pointing to Vedic traditions that focus on nature and elemental forces. “There is worship of fire, water, and rain — it’s more expansive,” he said.
The petitioners also objected to a provision allowing non-Muslims to be part of the Central Waqf Council and state waqf boards. Sibal argued that unlike Hindu endowments, which restrict non-Hindu participation, the Waqf Act unnecessarily accommodates non-Muslims. “Even one non-Muslim inclusion is too much,” he remarked.
The order on the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 is expected to be delivered tomorrow. The outcome could have a significant impact on religious endowment laws and the extent of state involvement in managing faith-based charities.
The 2025 amendments to the Waqf Act have been contested for allegedly violating the secular fabric by over-regulating Muslim charitable endowments. Critics claim the changes dilute the religious autonomy of waqf institutions, while the Centre maintains they ensure transparency and accountability.
