After the Lok Sabha, the Waqf Amendment Bill was also passed in the Rajya Sabha, reshaping Muslim politics in India. After maintaining a relative silence on issues such as the hijab ban, UCC, and minority scholarships, Muslim organisations have now turned their attention to the Waqf amendment bill.
The bill passed with 288–232 votes in Lok Sabha and 128–95 in Rajya Sabha.
PM Modi called the passage of the Waqf Bill a key step toward justice, transparency, and inclusion, saying it will empower the long-marginalised.
Key issues raised by the government include lack of diversity in the formation of Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council, misuse of power by mutawallis (custodians of waqf properties), improper maintenance of property records, poor coordination with local revenue officials, encroachment, registration and declaration of titles of waqf properties, excessive powers granted to Waqf Boards, and minimal or no income from waqf properties.
This bill has brought the Modi government, the Opposition, and the Muslim community in India face to face. The bill has even split the Muslim community. While some oppose it, many others are supporting it, saying it targets Waqf land mafias who’ve looted crores and misused the properties. And that is why it is ThePrint’s Newsmaker of the Week.
There are 3,56,051 Waqf estates and over 8,72,000 immovable and 16,713 movable properties registered under the Waqf Board, with 3.3 lakh records digitised so far.
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) strongly opposed the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, saying it would harm rather than benefit Muslims. It alleged that Muslim organisations had raised concerns with the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), but these were ignored. According to the Board, Waqf properties hold religious importance equal to core Islamic practices such as prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage. The Board urged all MPs to consider the sentiments of the Muslim community and reject the proposed amendments, warning of protests similar to Shaheen Bagh.
From its introduction to its passage in Parliament, the Waqf Bill witnessed intense debates, opposition, accusations of betrayal, and even a dramatic moment when AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi tore a copy of the bill.
AIMPLB president Khalid Saifullah Rahmani claimed in August 2024 that NDA allies Chandrababu Naidu and Nitish Kumar had assured that their parties would oppose the Waqf Bill. However, the two leaders eventually backed the Centre on this issue.
The many changes
The root of the dispute lies in the Partition. After 1947, India and Pakistan agreed to transfer Muslim properties in India to Hindus and Hindu properties in Pakistan to Muslims. In 1950, India passed the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, placing properties left behind by Muslims who migrated to Pakistan—including Waqf assets—under the Custodian Department. Many were rented out at low rates to refugees from Pakistan, giving rise to the Waqf tenancy system, which became a key revenue source for Waqf boards.
The Waqf Act of 1954 established the Central Waqf Council and centralised Waqf management. The 1995 Act expanded powers and gave Waqf Tribunals authority above civil courts.
Critics of the Waqf Board, including Hindu groups, claim the 1995 law gives Waqf Boards the power to claim any land. Amendments in 2013, aimed at better transparency, faced implementation issues.
Apart from the Waqf Act of 1999, Waqf is also governed by the British-era Mussalman Wakf Act 1923.
Meanwhile, the politics around the Waqf Act continued. The controversy grew in 2022 when then-Delhi BJP chief Adesh Gupta led a protest, and BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay petitioned the Supreme Court to annul the Waqf Act, calling it discriminatory.
In December 2023, BJP MP Harnath Singh Yadav introduced a private member’s bill in Rajya Sabha to repeal the Waqf Act. In a tense vote, 53 members supported the introduction, while 32 opposed.
Last year, along with the Waqf Amendment bill, the Mussalman Wakf Repeal Bill was also introduced. The former was aimed at the 1999 law, while the latter concerned the 1923 law.
Contentious section 40
The country’s third-largest property owner, the Waqf Board, has been entangled in controversies for decades. Hindu organisations and other critics accuse it of forced encroachment, corruption, and financial irregularities, some even question the donations of certain properties. Communal tensions, political disputes, and stereotypical narratives have further complicated the situation.
Union Minister Kiren Rijiju said in Lok Sabha that the Waqf Amendment Bill aims to make the Waqf Board more secular and inclusive by adding non-Muslim experts and ensuring women’s representation at both state and central levels.
The bill faced criticism from Opposition parties and sections of the Muslim community for lacking stakeholder consultation. They called it unconstitutional and claimed it aimed to weaken Waqf and reduce Muslims to ‘second-class citizens’. Muslim organisations described it as an attempt to render Waqf “ineffective” and turn it into “a lion without teeth.”
Muslim community is concerned about Section 40 of the Waqf Act. The Amendment Bill deletes it from the existing Act.
The section gives the Waqf board the power to decide whether a property is classified as a waqf property. There aren’t any provisions to appeal their decision. The Amendment bill gives the District Collector the power to decide. It also allows anyone to file an appeal against the board’s decisions.
According to Waqf officials, Section 40 is widely misunderstood. The board already struggles to manage existing properties and has no desire to bring more under its ambit. It relies on pre-1947 revenue records to verify if mosques, dargahs, or graveyards qualify as Waqf—basing claims strictly on official documents.
From anti-Waqf and pro-Waqf barcodes to email wars, heated arguments, injuries, and suspensions — the Joint Parliamentary Committee on the Waqf Bill, led by Jagdambika Pal, has witnessed it all.
On 30 January, the final report on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill was submitted to Speaker Om Birla. The new draft, released on 1 March, included 25 recommendations by the Joint Parliamentary Committee.
The amended law, as per JPC recommendations, allows only those practising Islam for at least five years to donate property to Waqf—restoring language removed in the 2013 amendments.
‘Waqf by use’—properties like mosques, graveyards, and dargahs—faces scrutiny. Prior to the recommendations, the bill aimed to remove this clause, which recognises religious-use properties as waqf even if unregistered. Fearing disputes, the JPC recommended it apply only to future cases.
As per the current version of the bill, properties registered before the 2025 law takes effect will remain waqf—unless disputed or government-owned. Experts say the impact will depend on how collectors assess each property’s history and use. Critics argue the Bill treats waqf like government property, shifting power to the Centre.
The minority community fears changes to the nature of Waqf properties, especially the “once a waqf, always a waqf” rule. While the government denies any change, the Muslim community insists this principle must stay in the new bill.
The 1995 Waqf law balances Islamic principles with Indian legal norms without interfering in law or religion. Changing the long-standing “once a waqf, always a waqf” rule could deepen the gap between Indian and Islamic Waqf systems.
Dr Mujibur Rehman, Assistant Professor at the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusion Policy at Jamia Millia Islamia told ThePrint that the amendments aim to control the Waqf Board’s income from properties and donations, with the government seeking to regulate funding sources citing national security concerns.
Whether it is a question of national security or national politics, there are no easy ways to understand these amendments.
(Edited by Theres Sudeep)
Muslims can still go to Pakistan is they are not happy hear
We all know how ideals are implemented in our country. Giving ad hoc arbitrary powers to any organization is not good. Pakistan was supposed to be ruled as per Islamic principles and see where they are now, fighting to understand what exactly those principles are. So all principles however ancient and hoary must be adapted and put to use judiciously for the benefit of the existing common man and woman.
Hindu might or power doesn’t seek to destroy/liberate/modify others. It merely seeks to protect itself and get respect where it is due.
Vasudeva kutumbhakam, the world is one, life is one is embedded into its ethos.
But once again the only issue is we know how ideals are implemented in our country or rather what goes on in the name of high ideals…..