Waqf Law U-Turn: Govt Pulls Back in Court — But Is This a Strategic Pause Before a Bigger Political Push?

Waqf Law Update: The ongoing debate around the Waqf law has now taken a dramatic new turn. The Central Government, while appearing to step back in the Supreme Court, may actually be playing a deeper political game. Is this a defeat or a calculated political move?

When the amended Waqf law was challenged in the Supreme Court, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the government, made it clear right at the beginning of the hearing that the government was not seeking any interim relief.

However, the bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna remarked — when a matter is sub-judice, no changes should be made to the prevailing situation. That one sentence made the Court’s stance clear. The government sensed the direction immediately.

Following this, the government made three major statements in court:

Three Major Declarations by the Government:

1. There will be no changes to the Waqf law for the next one week.
2. Properties claimed under “Waqf by user” — whether registered or not — will be considered valid.
3. State governments will not form any new Waqf Boards or Councils during this period.

Opposition Celebrates, But What’s the Reality?

As soon as these statements were recorded in court, the Opposition projected it as a major win.

Asaduddin Owaisi said — this is a “voluntary withdrawal” by the government, but in effect, it acts like a stay.
AAP leader Amanatullah Khan stated — this marks a defeat for BJP’s “divide and rule” politics.
Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi also described the court’s approach as balanced.

But the Government Views It Differently…

The government is not treating this as a defeat. Instead, it is being seen as an “honourable retreat.” The concern was that if the Supreme Court had issued a direct stay, it would have dealt a serious blow to one of the major initiatives of Modi government’s third term. Recognizing the Court’s stance, the government chose to step back strategically.

What’s the Government’s Next Move?

The government is set to submit a written reply in the Supreme Court on May 5. It will argue that provisions like “Waqf by user” are riddled with loopholes. Therefore, a new law is necessary. The government will also submit evidence — such as a case where Waqf was claimed on land belonging to the Delhi High Court. Even the Court has acknowledged misuse of this law in some instances. So, the government hopes the Court will see merit in its position.

The Court will examine the specific points where irregularities have been flagged. Rule changes or amendments are possible. The battle between “reform versus discrimination” will intensify politically. BJP is expected to shape the narrative around “justice on land” and “religious balance” in its favour.

Does Timing Matter Too?

Hearing Before CJI’s Retirement:
The timing of the hearing is significant. When the government replies on May 5, Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna will be just eight days away from retirement. Justice B.R. Gavai is set to take over as the next Chief Justice. This means the bench may change in the next hearing, which could influence the direction of the case. However, the Court remains independent and impartial.

What Comes Next?

Here’s what we can expect in the coming weeks:

1. May 5: Government files its detailed reply in SC.
2. Legal scrutiny begins on the core clauses—especially around ‘Waqf by User.’
3. Potential amendments or rule changes may be suggested based on SC feedback.
4. Narrative battles will intensify—between “reform vs discrimination” in political discourse.
5. BJP’s communication machinery may shift toward “land justice” and “institutional transparency” as counterpoints to religious framing.

Key Takeaways

Behind the Scenes: A CAA-style Strategy?

Government strategists believe this is a repeat of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) playbook. First, calm the public mood. Let the protests subside. Then implement the law — at a time and pace that suits the government. This allows the government to safeguard both legal and political interests.

The government was aware that a direct stay from the Court would have done more damage. Hence, it opted for a more graceful path. Also, the law hasn’t been implemented yet. That’s crucial — the Waqf law currently only exists on paper. It becomes enforceable only when its rules are framed. Those rules — or “implementation guidelines” — are yet to be drafted.

The government still has ample time. It can introduce rules four months later, or even after two years. The same approach was taken with the CAA. The law remained dormant for four years, only to be activated later when the situation was more favourable. It is believed the same model is being applied to the Waqf law as well.

This appears to be part of a long-term strategy — defuse the opposition now, implement the law later. A timing will likely be chosen when the Opposition is distracted and public attention is elsewhere. Precisely the same formula used for the Citizenship Law.

One Step Back, Two Steps Forward?

The real question isn’t “why did the government retreat,” but rather — “what’s the next move?” The position taken in the Supreme Court is not a defeat, but a strategic pause — a breather to let tempers cool and to prepare the ground for future implementation.

This is part of “political management” — where delaying confrontation is sometimes a smarter tactic than direct conflict. For now, the Waqf amendment has paused — but it hasn’t been permanently shelved.

As the Court’s timeline and political equations evolve, it will become clearer whether the Modi government is merely buying time — or preparing for a major legal-political leap.

The battle over the Waqf law has just begun — and the political heat is only going to rise.

What do you think? Is this smart politics — or a retreat under pressure? Let us know.

Also read:

Explosive Comeback? BJP-AIADMK Alliance Gears Up for Tamil Nadu 2026 Battle, But Will the DMK Fortress Crumble?