A practising Sikh has moved the Supreme Court against the recently enacted Waqf Act as he found that the Act barring non-Muslims from pledging their properties as Waqf—which he termed an infringement upon his fundamental rights—and the regulations over the Waqf affairs, while Sikh and Hindu trusts do not have such regulations, equally discriminatory and a constitutional violation. The petitioner also termed the amendments 'manifestly arbitrary' and 'antithetical' to the secular ethos enshrined in the Constitution."
Daya Singh, a practising Sikh and President of Gurdwara Singh Sabha in Gurgaon, has moved the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025, contending that the new provisions violate his fundamental rights and undermine the secular framework of the Constitution.
In a writ petition filed through Advocate-on-Record Shwetank Sailakwal, Singh argued that the amended Act bars non-Muslims from creating Waqf endowments, which infringes upon the rights of individuals to freely practise religion, express conscience, and exercise autonomy over property, all of which are protected under the Constitution, livelaw.in reported.
While stating that his charitable contributions have historically extended across religious lines, Singh claimed that the amendments introduced an unreasonable classification based solely on religion and lacked any rational nexus with the Act’s stated objectives.
"It introduces an unreasonable classification based solely on religion and lacks any rational nexus with the objectives it purports to achieve. That by excluding non-Muslims from making endowments to the Waqf, the Act impermissibly restricts their autonomy over property, freedom of conscience, and religious expression. The State, under the guise of regulating religious endowments, cannot prohibit or restrain voluntary acts of charity or devotion by individuals merely on account of their religious identity,"
He contended that the State, in the name of regulating religious endowments, could not prohibit or restrict voluntary acts of charity by individuals merely on the basis of their religious identity, and he described the amendment as both “manifestly arbitrary” and “antithetical” to India’s secular ethos.
The petitioner also claimed that the Act discriminates against Muslims by subjecting Waqf institutions to stricter oversight compared to the relatively autonomous functioning of Hindu and Sikh trusts, arguing that such differential treatment violates Article 14 of the Constitution.
He further supported his case by aligning with other pending challenges that question the removal of the 'waqf-by-user' provision, the mandatory five-year Islamic practice requirement to create Waqfs, and the inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf Boards.
A bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan is scheduled to hear the petitions challenging the Waqf Amendment Act 2025 today at 2 PM.