Waqf Waqf Ki Baat Hai: Understanding the Controversy Around New Waqf Bill

At a time when are becoming commonplace, the passing of the contentious Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, has led to serious concerns among Opposition leaders as well as community stakeholders about its potential impact on rights of the of India.

Tabled by the Central government last year, the Bill alarmed scholars, lawyers, and parliamentarians across the country and led to multiple protests. Now, despite being dubbed unconstitutional by critics, the Bill has been passed by both lower and upper houses with clear majority in what eventually boiled down to a numbers game.

What is Waqf and the Amendment Bill?

Before looking at the specifications of the bill, a note on Waqf:

Waqf (or Wakf) is an Islamic legal term referring to the permanent dedication of a property or asset for religious, charitable, or philanthropic purposes. When we talk about Waqf and its properties across the country, one would find most of them as mosques, hospitals, shelters, graveyards, dargahs etc.

It is pertinent to note that if a property is declared as Waqf once, then it cannot be sold, inherited, or gifted. It remains dedicated to serving the Muslim community (or a specified cause) in perpetuity.

It has been reported that in India, the controls or has around 8.7 lakh properties across the country—around 9.4 lakh acres with an estimated value of more than one lakh crore. In addition to this, India has probably the largest Waqf holding across the world. 

Introduced in Lok Sabha on 8 August 2024, the Bill amends the Waqf Act, 1995 to revise:

(i) Composition of the Council and Boards.

(ii) Criteria for forming Waqf.

(iii) Powers of the Board in identifying Waqf property. 

The Bill was then referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) chaired by Jagdambika Pal for wider scrutiny of the proposed reforms. The Bill was again introduced by the Central government during the Parliament session on 3 April.

The government claims that the Bill intends to ensure effective management of Waqf property to ensure that the revenue generated by these properties is equitably divided.

Leaders in favour of the bill purport that no interference with the religious affairs of Muslims will be done. After over 12 hours of heated debate between the ruling NDA and the Opposition’s .

The Bill was passed in Lok Sabha with 288 votes in favour and 232 against. Almost 24 hours and yet another marathon debate later, the Bill was passed in Rajya Sabha, with 128 votes for and 95 against. 

Concerns with the New Bill

The JPC had called for suggestions/modifications from stakeholders pertaining to the issue, but experts remain against the Bill in its current form. The main argument centres around the fact that the amendment would empower the government to regulate the management of Waqf properties and give it the power to determine whether a property is Waqf or not. 

1. Proof of practicing: The Bill stated that only a person who has been practicing Islam for at least five years can declare Waqf. Many scholars and experts questioned how such a hurdle or condition could be imposed at all. The JPC recommended that persons eligible to declare Waqf can include “any person showing or demonstrating that he/she is practicing Islam for at least five years.” The question is, why must anyone prove their religion? The requirement for proof of Islamic practice infringes on constitutional rights guaranteed under Article 25.

2. Omission of 'waqf by user': Stakeholders are also concerned over the Bill's omission of the provision relating to ‘Waqf by user’. The JPC had proposed that there should be a proviso/explanation saying that the said provision will be applicable prospectively and not retrospectively. In this regard, the Central government clarified that the omission is prospective in nature and will not affect Waqf by user before the passing of the bill.

For better understanding, let's understand what ‘Waqf by user' is. A ‘waqf by user ‘refers to a property that is treated as waqf based on its long-term use for religious or charitable purposes, even without formal documentation. This principle has been a part of Indian Waqf law, recognising properties that have been continuously utilised for religious or charitable activities as Waqf.

(i) “Waqf” means the permanent dedication by any person, of any movable or immovable property for any purpose recognised by the Muslim law as pious, religious or charitable and includes:

(ii) A Waqf by user but such Waqf shall not cease to be a waqf by reason only of the user having ceased irrespective of the period of such cesser;

3. Empowering the Collector: One of the most criticised provisions was the insertion of Section 3C, which states that any government property identified or declared as Waqf before or after the amendment shall not be deemed Waqf property. In case of any dispute regarding the nature of the said property, the ultimate power will vest with the District Collector.

The JPC took note of the objections which were raised by the stake holders, Opposition and experts and suggested that the main decision of appointment of any official should vest with the state government. In response, the government accepted the suggestion and modified the provision to the extent that the word “higher ranking officer” to be the in-charge of the process. 

4. Including non-Muslim board members: Concerns have been raised about the inclusion of non-Muslim members in Central Waqf Council, Board of Auqaf, and State Waqf Board. The JPC stated that the inclusion of non-Muslim members will make it more broad-based and promote inclusivity and diversity among the Waqf management.

5. Provision of appeal to High Court: Earlier, the decision of the Waqf Tribunal was final and there was no appeal against the order/judgment. Now, an addition has been made in the 2024 amendment stating that the Tribunal’s decision is not final and the same can be appealed within two years from the date of judgment. 

Incidentally, through all the debates and discussions over the Waqf Bill, only the suggestions made by leaders of the NDA were taken into consideration, not the ones made by the Opposition.

Waqf Legislations Over the Years

The first Waqf law was enacted in 1913.

Stuck in Statistics

Now that the Bill has been passed in both the houses and has attained majority at both the places, it will be sent to the President for approval.

The entire exercise reflects the fact that debate and discussion on the bill was reduced to just a game of numbers. And when numbers outreach suggestions/modifications, there's a threat to healthy discussions and criticism.

On one hand, the Union government praised the changes to the Waqf Act and hailed the Bill, but Opposition leaders contended that the bill violated the constitutional rights of Indian Muslims.

The fact that none of the suggestions tabled by the Opposition leaders were accepted by the Committee sends a bad message. Because even without Opposition attaining a majority, it represents more than 220+ seats within the Parliament.

Moreover, critics argue that the amendment fails to address existing inefficiencies in Waqf management, such as corruption and mismanagement of assets. Instead of introducing robust accountability mechanisms, the bill further centralises control, which could exacerbate bureaucratic delays and misuse of Waqf properties.

The 12-hour-long debate in the Lok Sabha reflected deep divisions, with Opposition members pointing out that the amendments may disproportionately affect minority rights while doing little to improve the socio-economic conditions of the intended beneficiaries.

Congress MP objected to the Bill in Parliament and questioned the intention of the government with regard to its controversial provisions. Questioning the provision where only a Muslim who has been practicing Islam for five years can make donations, Gogoi said, “It is a sad situation when the government decides who qualifies as a practicing Muslim. Will they apply the same rule to people of other religion? And why is the government interfering in religious matters?”

Congress' also took a dig at the inclusion of non-Muslim members in the council and board and power being vested with the district collectors. Temple trusts don’t allow people of other religions, why should Waqf Board allow non-Muslims, he asked. 

The Road Ahead

It is not that everything is wrong about the new Bill. In this regard, it is important to point out that the Bill ensures that women and children must receive their rightful inheritance before any property is declared as Waqf, with special safeguards for widows, divorced women, and orphans. 

But certain provisions in the Bill might dilute the objective of the Waqf Act itself. The Bill empowers the government to take control over the matters and affairs of Waqf, which mainly vests with the Muslim community at large. Thus one of the contentions against the Bill was the non-consultation with community leaders, Muslim stakeholders and others who stand to be directly affected by the Bill.

Ultimately, while the Waqf Amendment Bill, 2025 was passed with the intent of reforming Waqf governance, its provisions raise legitimate concerns about fairness and effectiveness.

Without stronger safeguards against misuse of its provisions and greater emphasis on accountability, the law risks becoming a tool for administrative overreach rather than a means of empowerment.

As legal challenges and public scrutiny mount, it remains to be seen whether the government will address these flaws or if the judiciary will need to intervene to uphold the principles of justice and equitable governance.

(Areeb Uddin Ahmed is an advocate practicing at the Allahabad High Court. He writes on various legal developments. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for them.)