New Delhi, May 21 (UNI) Alleging that a "false narrative" was being spread that waqf properties were being "snatched.", .Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that it was merely an attempt to "mislead" the country

Beginning his submissions before the top judiciary on the challenge to the amendments related to waqf property registration and administration, Mehta stated, “A false narrative is being spread that waqf properties are being snatched. This is nothing but an attempt to mislead the country.

The hearing forms part of the constitutional challenge to the amended Waqf Act, which petitioners claim infringes upon minority rights.

On Waqf Registration, Mehta argued that Waqf "by mere user is not permitted prospectively, except in three specific cases. Without registration, a claim cannot be made. Otherwise, it would legitimise something that has been penal for the past 102 years.”

On encroachment and Government land, he cited instances from Andhra Pradesh where government land was "virtually encroached" and asserted that revenue records have always been maintained by revenue authorities.

"Please refer to the Crawford Bayley judgment," he said, adding Waqf was not a Fundamental Right/ SG Mehta contended that Waqf is a concept recognised by statute, not a fundamental right.

“If a right is granted by a statute, it can also be withdrawn by a statute.”

Waqf is not essential to Islam, he clarified, “Waqf is an Islamic concept, but it is not an essential religious practice unless proven otherwise. Charity is present in every religion, be it Hinduism (daan), Christianity, or Sikhism...Waqf is essentially Islamic charity,.” he said.

On the secular nature of Waqf Boards, the SG emphasised that they perform only secular functions like managing properties and auditing accounts.

“Having two non-Muslim members in the Board changes nothing. Religious activities are untouched. Even in Hindu temples, the Pujari is appointed by the State under the Hindu Endowments Act.The administration of property must comply with legal regulations," he argued.

Muslim representation is still predominant, he said, adding that “even the minister and Joint Secretary are usually Muslims.

Only two members are non-Muslim. Moreover, waqf institutions include schools, orphanages, and other charitable entities that serve non-Muslims too.”

On parallels with Other Religious Institutions, the SG Quoted, “In Bombay, we have the Bombay Public Trust Act that governs temples, churches, and waqfs alike.”

On petition to stay the Law, SG Mehta warned against granting a stay.

“Staying the Act would be tantamount to allowing the petition without adjudication," he said.

Responding to a question from the CJI on whether a muttawali must be a Muslim, SG said, “May or may not be, depending on the Waqf.”

The SG said Hindu endowment activities are more pervasive and focused on religious aspects, unlike waqf, which deals largely with secular charitable functions.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal had previously argued that the Bill was not circulated in Parliament. The CJI acknowledged the claim,saying, “We have recorded that it was not circulated, and there was no time for discussion in the JPC or Parliament.”

SG responded by pointing to Para 12, Page 5 of the JPC Report, asserting, “The report was placed before the House.

Hearing will resume on Thursday. UNI SNG SSP