Waqf Act 2025

On August 8, 2024, two significant bills were introduced in the Lok Sabha: the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 and the Mussalman Wakf (Repeal) Bill, 2024. These bills are aimed at improving the functioning of the Waqf Board and ensuring better management of Waqf properties.

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 seeks to amend the Waqf Act, 1995, addressing the challenges in the regulation and administration of Waqf properties. The main goal of the amendment is to enhance the management of Waqf properties across India. It includes provisions to:

• Address the limitations of the previous act and boost the effectiveness of Waqf boards.

• Propose changes such as renaming the Act for better clarity.

• Update definitions related to Waqf.

• Improve the registration procedures for Waqf properties.

Why the Act has attracted legal scrutiny and public attention

The Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 has attracted legal scrutiny and public attention due to several challenges arising during its enforcement. One of the primary reasons is the concerns raised by the Muslim community regarding the amendment of the Waqf Act of 1995. They argue that the changes introduced by the 2025 amendment could potentially violate several fundamental rights guaranteed under the Indian Constitution of 1950. The community has raised alarms about the extent of state control over Waqf properties and the implications of this oversight on their religious and cultural autonomy. This controversy has sparked debates over the balance between government intervention and religious freedom, thus drawing significant public and legal attention.

History of Waqf Laws in India

The history of Waqf laws in India dates back to 1810, when the government first began regulating Waqf properties. Initially managed by qazis (judges), Waqf properties began deteriorating after the decline of the Mughal Empire. In 1810, a law was enacted in Calcutta, followed by one in Madras in 1817, and in 1818, the Board of Revenue took over the management of Waqf properties.

In 1863, previous laws were repealed, and religious Waqfs were placed under mutawallis (administrators), with the government retaining control over non-religious properties. The 1890 Charitable Endowment Act treated charitable Waqfs as trusts, ending their perpetual maintenance.

The British colonial period saw the dismantling of Waqf properties through sales and policies that led to their destruction. In 1873, the Bombay High Court ruled against ‘Waqf Alal Aulad,’ and the Privy Council upheld this decision in 1894. However, Justice Amir Ali in the Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of the Waqf, sparking agitation among Muslims for legal protection.

The Waqf Act, 1995 and Its Role in Managing Waqf Properties

The Waqf Act, 1995, was enacted to address the mismanagement and misuse of Waqf properties in India. It established a legal framework for the administration, regulation, and protection of Waqf properties, ensuring transparency and accountability. The Act set up State Waqf Boards and a Central Waqf Council to oversee the management of these properties, ensuring that they were used for religious, charitable, and public purposes as intended by the donors.

Under the Act, a proper registration system for Waqf properties was introduced, and the role of mutawallis (administrators) was formalized to prevent misuse or illegal encroachment. The Act also provided for the establishment of a Waqf Tribunal to address disputes, ensuring timely resolution of conflicts related to Waqf properties.

Overall, the Waqf Act, 1995, aimed to protect the integrity of Waqf properties, streamline their administration, and ensure that they were managed in accordance with Islamic law.

major concerns from the perspective of the central government regarding the Waqf Act, 1995-

1. Absence of Court Supervision

• The Waqf Act, 1995, lacks direct judicial supervision in many of its administrative processes. This absence has led to concerns about the effectiveness of dispute resolution and the potential for administrative malpractices without proper judicial oversight.

2. Shortcomings in Regulating Waqf Properties

• The Act does not adequately address issues such as title disputes and unlawful possession of Waqf land. There are cases where properties are wrongly identified as Waqf properties or encroached upon, leading to legal challenges and disputes over ownership.

3. Misuse of Section 40

• Section 40 of the Waqf Act has been widely misused to declare private properties as Waqf properties. This misuse has led to legal battles, confusion over property ownership, and public unrest, as individuals and organizations contest the classification of their properties as Waqf.

4. Waqf by Use

• The concept of “Waqf by use” allows a property to be considered Waqf, even if the ownership is unclear. This provision has caused complications, as properties may be deemed Waqf without proper documentation or a clear owner, leading to disputes over the true ownership and management of the property.

the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 addresses these major concerns by proposing reforms aimed at improving transparency, accountability, and the overall efficiency of Waqf property management. The reforms seek to minimize legal disputes, curb misuse, and ensure that Waqf properties are managed in a more regulated and accountable manner.

Controversy Related to Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025

The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 has sparked significant controversy and legal challenges, particularly with petitions in the Supreme Court raising serious concerns about its constitutionality and potential impact on religious autonomy. The main issues that have been raised include:

1. Violation of Supreme Court Pronouncement: “Once a Waqf, Always a Waqf”

• Petitioners argue that the new amendment violates the Supreme Court’s previous pronouncement regarding the permanence of Waqf properties, encapsulated in the phrase “Once a Waqf, always a Waqf.” According to this legal principle, once a property is declared Waqf, it cannot be de-notified or altered by any subsequent legislation. The amendment, however, is perceived as giving the government the power to interfere with the status of Waqf properties, leading to concerns that the act may overturn this long-standing legal doctrine.

2. Encroachment of Government in Religious Affairs

• The amendment has also been criticized for what some view as an encroachment of government control into religious affairs, particularly within the Muslim community. Critics argue that it undermines the autonomy of religious institutions and infringes on their right to self-manage their properties. The inclusion of two non-Muslim members in the Waqf Board and the Waqf Council, as mandated by the amendment, has been seen as a deliberate move to erode the influence of Muslim experts and replace them with representatives from other communities. This is particularly controversial as it is viewed by some as an attempt by the BJP government to exert control over Muslim religious affairs.

3. The Abolishment of the Waqf by Use Concept

• The Waqf by Use concept, which has been legally recognized in India, is a central issue in the controversy. This concept allows properties to be deemed Waqf based on their use for religious or charitable purposes, even if the legal ownership is unclear. The Ram Janmabhoomi case affirmed this concept, and the abolishment of Waqf by Use in the new amendment has led to fears that the government will have unchecked powers to challenge and potentially seize properties that were previously classified as Waqf. Critics argue that this could lead to widespread legal disputes over the status of numerous Waqf properties.

4. Violation of Fundamental Rights Under Article 26

• A significant concern raised by the petitioners is that the amendment violates the fundamental rights of religious denominations, particularly under Article 26 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to manage religious affairs. The article protects the autonomy of religious communities in managing their own affairs, including the administration of their properties. Critics argue that the 2025 amendment, by imposing greater government control and altering the Waqf Board’s structure, infringes upon this right, potentially infringing on the constitutional protections afforded to religious denominations.

case laws:

1. Sayyed Ali and Others v. A.P. Wakf Board, Hyderabad and Others
2. Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid Judgment (2019)

Sayyed Ali and the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid judgment — have important implications for Waqf law and property disputes in India, particularly in how religious properties are managed and classified. While Sayyed Ali focused on the role of the Waqf Board and the importance of proper documentation, the Ram Janmabhoomi judgment was a landmark decision in terms of religious freedom, property rights, and the status of Waqf property.

Conclusion

Religion and State interference have always been subjects of intense debate, with the line between the two often being incredibly thin. The role of law, in this context, is crucial as it helps address outdated or arbitrary practices that society deems unsuitable. Landmark judgments like the Sabarimala case have underscored the delicate balance between religious freedom and state intervention, highlighting the complexities of regulating religious practices while ensuring equality and constitutional rights.

Similarly, laws governing the administration of Hindu temples have raised similar questions about the extent of state control over religious institutions. Our Constitution provides the right to freedom of religion, ensuring that individuals and communities can practice their faith without undue interference. However, this freedom is not absolute, and certain regulations are required to prevent misuse, mismanagement, or encroachments.

Now, the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 raises important questions regarding the intention behind its provisions. Are these amendments truly aimed at improving the management of Waqf properties for the betterment of the community, or are they part of a targeted effort that risks alienating or affecting the sentiments of a particular community? The answer is not clear-cut, as the provisions in the amendment, particularly those related to governance structures and government control, have sparked concerns about possible state overreach.

As the debate over state intervention in religious matters continues, it becomes imperative to ensure that any amendments or legal reforms made in the future are not just politically motivated but are aimed at ensuring efficiency, transparency, and the protection of religious rights. Balancing religious freedom with state regulation remains a delicate task, and careful consideration is required to maintain this equilibrium in the context of Waqf management.

The future of Waqf properties and their administration will depend on the careful implementation of reforms, ongoing dialogue, and a commitment to preserving the fundamental rights of all communities. Only through collaborative efforts can we ensure that these legal changes benefit the entire society while respecting the diverse religious traditions and beliefs that make up the fabric of our nation.

Reference

1. Sayyed Ali and Others v. A.P. Wakf Board, Hyderabad and Others
2. Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid Judgment (2019)
3. Waqf Amendment Bill 2025 – Government of India (Press Information Bureau)