SC Responsible For Inciting Religious War, Crossing Limits: BJP MP As Anger Against Judiciary Grows Over Waqf Act

Delhi: BJP MP Nishikant Dubey has expressed his disagreement over observations made by the Supreme Court over the recently passed Waqf Amendment Act 2025 suggesting that the Parliament and State Assembly should be shutdown if one has to go to the Supreme Court for everything.

Using strong language against the Supreme Court, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey said that the Supreme Court should be held responsible for inciting religious wars in the country and is beyond its limits. The job of the Supreme Court is to interpret the law which has been formed by following the constitution of the country.

The BJP MP lashed out at the top court saying when there is a matter about Ram Mandir , Krishna Janmabhoomi, or Gyanvapi the court asks petitioners to show them the documents, or proofs but look at the hypocrisy as when it comes to the mosques built during the Mughal era, the court says how will they show proofs or documents.

“...Supreme Court is responsible for inciting religious wars in the country. The Supreme Court is going beyond its limits. If one has to go to the Supreme Court for everything, then Parliament and State Assembly should be shut...” Nishikant Dubey said.

One fine morning, you decide on homosexuality, Nishikant Dubey raps Supreme Court  

Expressing his disagreements with the Supreme Court on a number of issues, Nishikant Dubey said highlighted instances when the court intervened over the law on homosexuality or asking the President or the Governor what they have to do regarding a law.

“There was an Article 377 in which homosexuality is a big crime. Even the Trump administration has said that there are only two sexes in this world, either male or female...Whether it is Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Jain or Sikh, all believe that homosexuality is a crime. One fine morning, the Supreme Court said that we abolish this case...,” Dubey said.

“Article 141 says that the laws we make, the judgments we give, are applicable from the lower court to the Supreme Court. Article 368 says that Parliament has the right to make all laws and the Supreme Court has the right to interpret the law. The top court is asking the President and Governor to tell what they have to go regarding the Bills,” BJP MP added.

“When Ram Mandir or Krishna Janamboomi or Gyanvapi comes, you (Supreme Court) says that show us the paper, documents but when it comes to the mosque made in the Mughal era, then it says how will they show papers,” Nishikant Dubey mentioned.

Parliament will have detail discussions on judiciary, says Nishikant Dubey 

Alleging the Supreme Court wants to take this country towards “anarchy”, the BJP leader said that there will be detailed discussion on this when the Parliament will sit.

"How can you give direction to the appointing authority? The President appoints the Chief Justice of India. The Parliament makes the law of this country. You will dictate that Parliament?... How did you make a new law? In which law is it written that the President has to take a decision within three months? This means that you want to take this country towards anarchy. When the Parliament sits, there will be a detailed discussion on this," Dubey said.

In another statement, Nishikant Dubey said that the top court has only one aim 'Show me the face, will show you the law'.

He mocked the top judiciary body saying that if Supreme Court has to make the law then close down the Parliament.

BJP distance itself from Nishikant Dubey's remarks 

Hours after Nishikant Dubey's remarks aimed at Supreme Court, the Bharatiya Janata Party issued a statement and distanced itself from former's comments.

The saffron party said that it has nothing to do with the statements made by Nishikant Dubey and also Dinesh Sharma on the judiciary and the Chief Justice of the country. These are their personal statements, but the BJP neither agrees with such statements nor does it ever support such statements. The BJP completely rejects these statements.

"BJP has always respected the judiciary and gladly accepted its orders and suggestions because as a party we believe that all the courts of the country including the Supreme Court are an integral part of our democracy and are the strong pillar of the protection of the Constitution," BJP President and Union Minister JP Nadda said in a statement.

“I have instructed both of them and everyone else not to make such statements,” the BJP chief added.

Questions raised on Supreme Court's observations on Waqf Amendment Act  

The Supreme Court while hearing petitions challenging the Waqf Amendment Act 2025 -- aimed at reforming the Waqf Act of 1995 – was mulling to put an interim stay on a number of key provisions of the freshly enacted law, passed by Parliament with overwhelming majority, and receiving President Murmu's assent.

However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta saved the day for the government and sought time till the next hearing to present government's case on the Waqf Amendment Act.

The three-judge SC bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna made observations and mooted stay on three key provisions including inclusion of non-Muslims in Central Waqf Council and Waqf Boards, power to collectors on deciding dispute over Waqf By User and provisions on de-notifying properties declared as Waqf by courts.

All these three parts of the law was critical to its functioning and crucial for keeping the activities of the Waqf board in check and also to verify whether claims made by Waqf boards on lands were authentic or an act of illegal occupation.

During the hearing, the Supreme Court did say that how will people who may be asked to prove the authenticity of their Waqf claim will furbish documents anything related to the Mughal era. Contrary to this, the courts had asked to furnish proofs when it was hearings matters like Ram Janmabhoomi, Krishna Janmabhoomi or Gyanvapi.