The controversial Waqf Amendment Act 2025 came into effect from April 5, 2025, after the Ministry of Law and Justice issued a gazette notification on Saturday night once President Droupadi Murmu gave her assent to the amendments passed at wee hours earlier in the week in both Houses of Parliament.
The new Act has superseded the 1995 Waqf Act and will now euphemistically be called UMEED (Unified Waqf Management Empowerment Efficiency and Development Act). Muslim groups and opposition parties have for long questioned the intentions of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led NDA government over the haste in bringing the amendments despite strong resistance from the stakeholders. The secretary to the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has said that the “discriminatory and unjust amendments” of the new Act will be challenged in the Supreme Court.
The New Act
The Narendra Modi led government could pass the bill easily because of support from the NDA partners, most prominently the Telugu Desam Party (TDP), Janata Dal (United) and Lok Janshakti Party Ramvilas (LJP), who have sizeable Muslim vote-base in their respective states.
The Opposition labelled the passing of the bill in consecutive overnight sessions a “means to grab land”. AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi said, “It is a violation of Article 26 and unconstitutional.” Rahul Gandhi tweeted, “The Waqf (Amendment) Bill is a weapon aimed at marginalising Muslims and usurping their personal laws and property rights”.
Kiren Rijiju, the Minister of Minority Affairs, however, noted in Parliament: Some members have said that minorities are not safe in India. This statement is completely false. There is no place safer than India for minorities. I am also a minority and we all are living here without any fear and with pride.” Although BJP’s coalition partners supported the government, they suggested that states should be given the flexibility to decide the composition of Waqf boards.
The BJP government claims that this Act will improve and enhance efficiency in the management and administration of Waqf properties. The Waqf Council will now include non-Muslims and Muslim women. However, “No non-Islamic member will be a part of Waqf. Understand this clearly, neither the mutawalli nor the waqif will be a non-Muslim. There is
no provision for the appointment of a non-Muslim to manage the religious institution, nor do we intend to introduce any such provision,” said Home Minister Amit Shah.
The government has emphasised that the non-Muslim members of the Waqf Board will not interfere with the religious practices; they will ensure transparency in administration.
But similar institutions governing Hindu and Sikh endowments primarily comprise of members only from their respective faiths. Therefore, it raises serious concerns under Articles 14 (equality before law) and 15 (prohibition of discrimination based on religion). The new Act has removed the requirement for an expert in Muslim law on Waqf Tribunals. This may further affect redressal of Waqf-related disputes. The Act also limits the creation of Waqf to only people professing Islam for at least five years. The rationale behind such a
criterion is unclear. This creates a distinction between persons practicing Islam for less than five years and those doing so for more than five years. It also seeks to have a separate “Board of Auqaf” for Bohras and Aghakhanis. Under this, it is now mandatory to register “deemed to be waqf” properties under the district administration.
What is Waqf?
Waqf (pl. Awqaf) is derived from the Arabic waqafa (meaning tie up, lock up, sale and purchase of assets), and is an inalienable charitable endowment held in trust under Islamic sharīah’ or Islamic law. In the formal process of establishing a waqf, the donor (waqif) dedicates the assets (mawquf) that involve land and buildings for Muslim religious or charitable purposes for the larger benefit of the community, and these are not to be reclaimed — i.e. once a property becomes a waqf, it remains so forever, something that is accepted even by the Indian Constitution.
The waqf properties largely comprise mosques, idgahs (places for congregational prayer), dargahs (sufi shrines), imambaras (Shia buildings for mourning congregations), maqbaras (mausoleums), anjumans (associations or assemblies), madrasahs, and qabristans (graveyards), besides land attached to such institutions, and are generally managed by a trust on behalf of the community.
In 1909, a Waqf Association was established for the restoration of the waqf. Passing through various stages and through efforts of eminent Islamic scholars, reformers and thinkers, a Bill was finally passed as an Act on March 7, 1913, known as Musalaman Wakf Validating Act 1913, restoring the right of Muslims to make family waqf.
Since then, a series of Waqf Acts were passed by the Government of India. Waqf Act of 1954, Waqf Act of 1995 and Waqf Act of 2013 were implemented, and these sought to assign more power to the waqf boards — like the prohibition of the sale, gift, exchange, mortgage or transfer of waqf property under Section 104A, with violators facing rigorous imprisonment. The Waqf Act of 1954 was amended over a period of time — in 1959, 1964, 1969 and 1984,
with finally, the Waqf Act of 1995 coming into effect. This too was amended with the Waqf Amendment Act 2013 coming into force.
There are apprehensions that the 2025 Act will totally undermine the constitutional safeguards provided in the 2013 Act. It omits Section 40 of the old Act, which relates to the powers of the waqf boards to decide if a property is Waqf property. The most troubling provision of the new Act is that it empowers the government to determine the ownership of Waqf properties in the absence of documents, which can lead to arbitrary takeover the historical religious sites. This Act itself raises so many questions and hence the widespread protests from the minority community.
Larger Implications
To create consensus in the minds of the majority, Hindutva forces, aided by a section of media, labelled waqf properties as land jihad. It has been wrongly alleged that waqf boards unscrupulously seize lands of the Hindus. It has instilled a sense of fear among the Hindus.
There have been allegations in the past of mismanagement of waqf properties and under-utilisation by different auqaf boards, and also encroachments, most notably by different government agencies. But the removal of “waqf by user” in the new Act will prove to be a
loss for the Muslim community, especially in the major urban centres. Most of the auqaf records are outdated or incomplete although their digitisation project began many years ago. The digitisation of waqf assets by the government seems to be opaque. A completed digitisation process would have helped in identifying the waqf properties in the country.
A continuous interference in the religious matters of the Muslim community is witnessed since the BJP government came to power in 2014. The abrogation of Article 370 (2019) in the Muslim majority state of Jammu and Kashmir, which has since bifurcated into two Union Territories, the Triple Talaq law (2019), the Citizen Amendment Act (2019), the Supreme Court judgment on the Ram Temple in Ayodhya (2019), and now the Waqf Amendment Act (2025) are seen as direct attacks on the constitutional rights of the Muslim community. Muslims, who remain politically and economically marginalised, have also faced unjust
demolitions of their houses for merely protesting, as also several cases of mob-lynching in the name of beef consumption.
The new Waqf Act overlooks the principles of the Constitution, not only crushing the idea of a “secular nation” but also marginalising the community in every possible manner. The Opposition rightly said that Muslims are now being reduced to “second class citizenship”.
The Muslim community in India has faced educational backwardness and multidimensional poverty compared to other communities. The central government has discontinued scholarships and deprioritised sector lending that benefit them. While inclusivity in governance is concerned, the representation of Muslims in public and legislative bodies remains disproportionately low.
As of 2024, Muslims constitute 14% of India’s population but have only 4.42% (24 members) representation in the Lok Sabha. Needless to say, this systematic under-representation extends to the state legislatures as well. Consequently, the provision for public representatives may result in from the effective exclusion of Muslims from decision-making processes concerning
waqf properties, undermining the constitutional safeguards provided under:
- Article 25: Freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, andpropagate religion since donating assets to Allah (waqf) and its ethical management is an important religious practice for Muslims.
- Article 26: Freedom to manage religious affairs, including the administration of religious properties.
- Article 29: Protection of cultural and educational rights of minorities.
A continuous attack on the religious, and educational rights of the Muslim community accorded to them by the Constitution does not only create a governance structure that may not effectively serve the intended beneficiaries, it also doesn’t uphold the constitutional principles of religious freedom and federalism.
Kainat Siddiqui
Research Associate at SABAR Institute, Kolkata
Ph.D. in History from Aligarh Muslim University
