Parliament passed a new Waqf Act in 1995 repealing the 1954 Act. Major amendments were made in 2013. I counted 57 amendments.
Barely 12 years have passed. If, based on complaints from stakeholders, the government had concluded that amendments were necessary or expedient, it could have brought reforms through an amendment Bill. However, reform of the law is not what the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 does. On the contrary, it has taken a scythe to the existing law and mutilated it beyond recognition.
The first principle in a multi-religious democratic country is that all religions are equal. The administration of religious institutions must be in the hands of persons belonging to the religious denomination. In India, where a majority of the people are Hindus, the principle will apply to Hindu religious and charitable institutions. In the case of ‘minority’ religions too, the principle will apply according to the Constitution of India. Article 26 reads:
Freedom to manage religious affairs —
Subject to public order, morality and health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right —
(a) to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes;
(b) to manage its own affairs in matters of religion;
(c) to own and acquire movable and immovable property; and
(d) to administer such property in accordance with law.
Hindu religious and charitable institutions are administered by Hindus and Hindus alone. No one would suggest — or accept — that in the administration of Hindu temples and religious/charitable institutions, non-Hindus may have a role. (In fact, there is a demand by the chief minister of Andhra Pradesh that non-Hindus ought not to be appointed even as employees of the Tirupati-Tirumala Devasthanam).
The same view will be held by millions of believers in any other religion. At present, in no religious place of worship or religious/charitable institution of Hinduism, Christianity, Sikhism or Buddhism does the law allow any role for a believer in any other religion.
Under the Waqf Act, 1995, the principle was scrupulously observed. A waqf means the permanent dedication of property by any person for any pious, religious or charitable purpose recognized by Muslim law. Courts have recognized a waqf that was created by a non-Muslim, and examples are many. Further, under the existing law, a waqf is, by and large, independent and autonomous. The highest regulatory body in a State is the Board of Waqfs that consists of members who are all Muslims and the Chief Executive Officer is required to be a Muslim. The Board in exercise of its powers is required to “act in conformity with the directions of the waqf, the purposes of the waqf and any usage or custom of the waqf.” The only body that has adjudicatory jurisdiction over waqf(s) is a Tribunal which is a judicial body presided over by a District Judge.
The controversial Amendment Bill turns on its head all the time-honoured principles and practices:
(i) ‘any person’ cannot create a waqf; only a person demonstrating that he is practising Islam for at least five years may create a waqf. Why? And how does a person ‘demonstrate’ that he is practising Islam? There was no answer.
(ii) the creator of a waqf must also demonstrate that there was no contrivance in the creation of the waqf. What is ‘contrivance’? There was no answer.
(iii) ‘waqf by user’ cannot be created after the Amendment Bill is enacted (although recognized by the Courts). Why? There was no answer.
(iv) if the property so dedicated is claimed as ‘government’ property, the inquiry will be conducted by a senior officer of the government who will determine whether such property is a government property and, if he so determines, he shall make the corrections in the revenue records. Will it not be a case of ‘judge in his own cause’? There was no answer.
(v) the requirement that the members of the State Waqf Board shall be Muslims has been deleted. Therefore, non-Muslims will be appointed; in fact, a mischievous government may ensure that the majority of members are non-Muslims. Will this retrograde provision be incorporated in laws governing institutions of other religions? Will non-Hindus be appointed to Hindu religious/charitable institutions? There was no answer.
(vi) the Limitation Act did not apply to recover waqf property; it will now apply. Will this amendment not protect encroachers and usurpers to plead limitation or plead ownership by adverse possession? There was no answer.
(vii) the model of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill is unique. Will it be adopted and laws concerning institutions of other religious communities be amended? There was no answer.
The assault on the Muslims by the BJP-led NDA government started with the NRC/CAA. UCC was first experimented in Uttarakhand. The only Muslim majority state of J&K was divided and reduced in status to Union Territories. In five years from 2019-20 to 2023-24, the budget allocations for minorities totaled Rs 18,274 crore but Rs 3,574 crore was unspent. Five streams of educational assistance to Muslims, including the Maulana Azad National Fellowship for minority students, were discontinued. The Waqf (Amendment) Bill is another assault on the Muslim community. Malice is writ large. In the view of the BJP the results of the LS elections in 2024 (240 seats) had not changed anything. The agenda is the same. The BJP is determined to pursue the agenda.
