Summary
The Waqf Act, 1995, and its 2025 amendment in India have been subjects of intense controversy and are currently under review by the Supreme Court of India. The Waqf Act pertains to an endowment of movable or immovable property for religious or charitable purposes under Muslim law, also known as a waqf . The 2025 amendment, named the United Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development, introduced a series of changes including an appeal process and renaming the Waqf Act. These changes have sparked legal challenges from prominent figures such as Asaduddin Owaisi, leader of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), and several Congress MPs who argue that the law undermines community autonomy and violates fundamental rights .
Additionally, the amendment has sparked nationwide protests, with critics suggesting that it represents an attempt to seize properties. Meanwhile, the government maintains that these changes will ensure greater transparency in managing waqf properties . The Supreme Court’s review is ongoing, with a three-judge bench set to deliberate on the constitutional validity of the Act . The controversy around the Waqf Act also involves allegations against Congress leaders Mallikarjun Kharge and the late Iqbal Saradgi regarding potential misuses of Waqf lands, sparking further political tensions .
The unresolved decision has fueled nationwide protests and has had significant societal impacts. The legislation’s potential impacts on minority rights, religious freedom, and property rights have sparked considerable debate and have implications for India’s Muslim community and the management of Waqf properties. As the Supreme Court continues to review the petitions challenging the Act, the outcome of this case is being watched closely by stakeholders across the nation.
Background
The Waqf Act, 1995, which was amended by the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, has been the center of considerable controversy in India. The Waqf Act, first introduced in 1913, was subsequently amended in 1923, 1954, and 1995 . The 1995 amendment incorporated tribunals for adjudicating waqf-related disputes and brought elected members and scholars in Islamic theology into the Board .
Waqf, as defined by the Waqf Act of 1995, is an endowment of movable or immovable property for purposes considered pious, religious, or charitable under Muslim law . A waqf can be established through a deed or instrument, or a property can be considered a waqf if it has been used for religious or charitable purposes over a long period . The management and creation of waqf in India has been governed by the Waqf Act, 1995 .
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, sought to rename the Waqf Act as United Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development , and introduced an appeal process that allowed decisions made by Waqf tribunals to be challenged in the High Court within 90 days . It was passed in Parliament after heated debates and received the assent of President Droupadi Murmu on April 5, 2025 .
Many of the provisions of the old Act are reflected in the Amendment Act of 2025, and several individuals, including AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), Congress MPs Imran Pratapgarhi and Mohammad Jawed, have filed petitions challenging the validity of the Act . These critics argue that the law violates fundamental rights, introduces state interference not applied to other religious institutions, and undermines community autonomy . The Supreme Court has taken strong note of these arguments, with a three-judge bench set to hear a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Act .
Key Challenges and Unresolved Issues
There have been a number of challenges and unresolved issues surrounding the Waqf Act, and its amendments, that have led to increased controversy and legal complexity. One of the main points of contention is the irrevocability of Waqf properties, encapsulated by the doctrine “once a Waqf, always a Waqf”. This doctrine has sparked numerous controversies, including legal disputes over islands in Bet Dwarka.
Furthermore, the Waqf Act, 1995, and its 2013 amendment, have proven to be ineffective in many cases. A surge in issues such as illegal land occupation, mismanagement, ownership disputes, and delays in registration and surveys has been noted. In fact, the ineffectiveness of the Act and its amendment has led to an increase in litigation and complaints to the ministry.
Despite these ongoing issues, there is no judicial oversight for Waqf tribunal decisions as they cannot be appealed in higher courts. This lack of oversight has raised concerns regarding transparency and accountability in Waqf management.
Senior Advocate Harish Salve has represented a challenge to the 1995 Waqf Act, and he believes that the Supreme Court can decide on the matter in its entirety. Although, some argue that the Act does not take away judicial review, and that the Waqf Tribunal is a judicial body subject to review.
The amendments to the Waqf Act, 1995, have been criticized for increasing state intervention in Waqf affairs. Critics have argued that the amendments violate Article 14 (right to equality), a Basic Feature of the Constitution, and introduce arbitrary classifications that lack any reasonable nexus with the objectives sought to be achieved.
Despite these criticisms, the government maintains that the amendment is essential for ensuring transparency in the management of Waqf properties.
As of now, the Supreme Court is set to hear a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act. The final decision on this matter remains unresolved and has led to widespread anticipation and concern across the country.
Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, colloquially known as the UMEED Act, aimed to repeal the Mussalman Wakf Act, 1923, and amend the Waqf Act, 1995. This piece of legislation seeks to regulate waqf property in India, marking significant changes to the governance and management of such properties. The Act was renamed to the United Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development Act.
The introduction of the amendment bill by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) raised some significant concerns, mainly due to the possible unprecedented control the government could have over waqf properties. This move resulted in criticism from Muslim groups who accused the Modi administration of using its parliamentary strength to further marginalise the minority community.
Controversies and Disputes
Some of the opposition to the Act argued that the proposed amendments violated Articles 14, 25, 26, 29, and 300A of the Indian Constitution, which cover equality, religious freedom, minority rights, and property. Critics, such as Jawed, a member of the Joint Parliamentary Committee that reviewed the bill, contended that the Act introduces arbitrary restrictions, such as a restriction based on the duration of religious practice. This provision could prevent recent converts from dedicating property under waqf, a condition regarded as alien to Islamic law.
Concerns were also raised over the potential misuse of waqf property, considering that under the Act, the courts have the power to inspect the functioning or management of such property. Misuse of waqf property or its usufructs is deemed a criminal offense as per the Waqf Act, 1995.
Legal Challenges
The Act faced a myriad of legal challenges due to issues of mismanagement, illegal land occupation, ownership disputes, registration delays, survey lags, and a surge in litigation and complaints to the ministry. Critics, such as the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), challenged the Act for being “arbitrary, discriminatory and based on exclusion”.
In addition, there were concerns about the lack of judicial oversight, as the Tribunal decisions under the Act cannot be appealed in higher courts. This raised questions about the accountability of the process. These factors, combined with delays in property surveys, especially in states like Gujarat and Uttarakhand, have hindered effective management.
Rajya Sabha MPs Manoj Jha and Faiyaz Ahmad from Bihar’s Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) were among those who challenged the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, arguing that it facilitates large-scale government interference in Muslim religious endowments.
Supreme Court’s Review of the Waqf Act
The Supreme Court of India has initiated a review on the Waqf (Amendment) Act. The primary issues being reviewed are the practice of ‘waqf by user’, the presence of non-Muslims on waqf boards, and the powers of the Collector. A three-judge bench, led by Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna, expressed concerns about the implications of revoking the practice of ‘waqf by user’.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar, and Justice KV Viswanathan, started hearing a total of 73 petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the act.
The opponents of the law argue that it violates fundamental rights and is a move to seize properties, while the government contends that the amendment is crucial for ensuring transparency in the management of Waqf properties. It was reported that Solicitor General reassured the court that no appointments would be made to the Council and Board until the next hearing and existing ‘waqf by user’ will not be denotified or changed by the Collector.
Senior Advocate Harish Salve expressed a challenge to the 1995 Waqf Act, pointing out that many of its provisions are reflected in the Amendment Act of 2025. He emphasized the importance of the Supreme Court seeing both dimensions and deciding the matter in a comprehensive manner.
The review also scrutinized the Act’s potential violation of certain Articles of the Constitution, such as those related to equality, religious freedom, minority rights, and property.
Despite the grave concerns raised, the Supreme Court refrained from passing any interim orders on the matter, instead opting to continue the hearings. The court acknowledged the far-reaching ramifications of the case, which necessitates careful deliberation and consideration.
Allegations against Congress Leaders
Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge has been notably implicated in alleged misuses of Waqf lands, especially in Kalaburagi, formerly known as Gulbarga. In addition, the late Iqbal Saradgi, a Congress leader and former MP, was also involved in dubious land deals. These allegations arose from the 2012 Karnataka Wakf Scam Report, which opposition MPs cited as their reason for boycotting the presentation of the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024. The opposition claimed that this report was being used to tarnish the reputation of the Congress-led Karnataka government and party President Mallikarjun Kharge.
The presentation of the controversial bill was made at a Joint Parliamentary meeting by the former chairman of the Karnataka State Minorities Commission and former Karnataka BJP vice-president, Anwar Manipaddy. In response to this, the Congress and other opposition parties have voiced their criticism, arguing that the bill could potentially result in the misappropriation of Waqf lands and infringe upon the constitutional rights of Muslims.
Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi has referred to the bill as unconstitutional, stating, “If the government was concerned about the welfare of Muslims, it should have taken the community into confidence before bringing this bill”. However, BJP MP Jagdambika Pal dismissed these protests as politically motivated, countering that “The protest was just for politics and the act had not even been introduced”. The Union Minister, Kiren Rijiju, who introduced the bill, defended it as a necessary reform aimed at curbing corruption and improving the management of Waqf properties.
Protests Triggered by Unresolved Decision
The Waqf Amendment Bill 2025 has sparked widespread protests across India, notably in Ahmedabad, Kolkata, and Chennai. The president of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) Gujarat unit and approximately 40 of its members were detained by Ahmedabad police after organizing a demonstration against the bill. Protests, which started following Friday Namaz, resulted in significant disruption as large crowds blocked key city roads and voiced their opposition to the bill through slogans. Notably, the Act’s lack of community consultation and increased government control have caused significant outcry and led to allegations of bureaucratic overreach and concerns about its acceptance within the Muslim community.
The protests are not just limited to the streets. Opposition leaders have challenged the constitutionality of the bill in the Supreme Court. Congress MP Mohammed Jawed, hours after the bill was passed by Parliament following a lengthy deliberation in the Rajya Sabha, challenged the Waqf Amendment Bill of 2025 in the Supreme Court. Furthermore, fresh petitions challenging the 2025 Act continue to pour in the Supreme Court, particularly after the law received the Presidential assent.
While BJP MP Jagdambika Pal dismissed the demonstrations as politically motivated, stating, “The protest was just for politics and the act had not even been introduced,” the Union Minister Kiren Rijiju defended the bill as a necessary reform aimed at curbing corruption and improving the management of Waqf properties. However, opposition voices, including Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge, argue that the legislation is a ploy by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to dilute the rights of minorities.
The Supreme Court, hearing 73 petitions challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, expressed disturbance at the violence occurring in protests against the new law. It suggested that violence during protests, such as in Murshidabad, has “emerged as a new mode of pressure tactics”.
Impacts and Implications
The Supreme Court’s review of the Waqf Amendment Act has sparked debate and controversy. The Act, designed to regulate waqf or Muslim properties, introduces substantial changes, some of which have been met with considerable criticism.
The Act bestows substantial control to state authorities over Waqf properties and disputes, which critics view as bureaucratic overreach that could lead to delays and legal challenges. It has also been criticised for insufficient consultation with Muslim stakeholders, which could potentially impact its legitimacy and acceptance within the Muslim community.
The introduction of the Act has sparked allegations from opposition parties, who contend that it represents a ploy by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to undermine the rights of minorities. Notably, Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge pointed out that while 288 members supported the bill in the lower house, a significant 232 members opposed it. Further, Congress Member of Parliament (MP) Imran Pratapgarhi has voiced strong opposition to the recently passed Bill, alleging that the government is attempting to divert public attention from pressing issues by focusing on matters affecting the Muslim community.
The omission of ‘waqf by user’ properties from the Act also has potential significant implications. Previously recognized under the 1954 Waqf Act, the fate of these properties remains uncertain under the
The content is provided by Avery Redwood, 11 Minute Read
