The Waqf Amendment Act 2025: Reform or marginalisation?

On April 4, 2025, after a 12-hour-long debate in the Rajya Sabha that followed a late-night passage in the Lok Sabha, the Indian Parliament passed the controversial Waqf Amendment Bill 2025. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi described the legislation as a “watershed moment,” comparing it to his government’s previous landmark decisions-the revocation of Article 370, the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), and the construction of the Ram Mandir. The Bill, which has been branded by the government as UMEED (or “hope”), was signed into law by the Indian President, Droupadi Murmu, and has sharply divided public opinion.

As per The Hindu, while proponents hail it as a step towards transparency and modernization, critics argue it is yet another move to marginalize India’s Muslim community. In Islamic jurisprudence, Waqf refers to a charitable endowment wherein a person donates property or land permanently for religious, educational, or social welfare purposes. Once designated as Waqf, the asset is considered to be held in the name of God, with a trustee (mutawalli) managing it according to the donor’s intent.

M. A. Qureshi in his book titled “Waqfs in India: A Study of Administrative and Legislative Control” clearly stated that this institution, central to Muslim socio-religious life, was legally recognized in India starting from the Muslim Waqf Validating Act of 1913, and subsequently formalized through the Waqf Act of 1954 and the comprehensive Waqf Act of 1995, which established Central and State Waqf Boards.

While the Indian government in its report on the issue released in 2013 clearly cited that the country has 32 Waqf Boards that collectively manage about 9.4 lakh acres of land, making them the third-largest landowners in the country after the Indian Railways and the Ministry of Defence. However, the economic output from these lands remains alarmingly low. The Sachar Committee Report (2006) highlighted that if effectively managed, Waqf properties could generate annual revenues of over Rs. 12,000 crore.

While Indian Express on April 4, 2025 reported that in contrast, Minister of Minority Affairs Kiren Rijiju recently revealed that Waqf assets currently generate just Rs163 crore annually, citing gross mismanagement and encroachments as the primary causes.

As per The Hindu, the Waqf Amendment Act 2025 introduces a series of sweeping reforms aimed at restructuring the functioning of Waqf institutions:

Abolition of the Doctrine of Waqf by User: Previously, land could be designated as Waqf if it had been used for religious purposes over a long period, even without formal documentation. The new law invalidates this doctrine, raising concerns over properties like mosques and graveyards that lack historical paperwork.

Repeal of Section 40: The Waqf Boards earlier had the authority to unilaterally declare a property as Waqf. This power now shifts to the District Collector-a state-appointed officer-thus curbing the autonomy of Waqf institutions.

Tribunal Overhaul: The amendment permits appeals from Waqf Tribunal decisions to be heard in High Courts. While this offers an additional legal route, critics worry it may overburden the judiciary and dilute community-specific dispute mechanisms.

Mandatory Digital Registration: All Waqf properties must now be digitally registered within six months, a move aimed at transparency and control. However, district authorities must verify these records, thereby further expanding state oversight.

Inclusion of Non-Muslims on Waqf Boards: For the first time, non-Muslims can be appointed to these boards-a measure touted as inclusive by the government but seen by many Muslim leaders as state intrusion into religious affairs.

For many in the Muslim community, however, the Act raises red flags about autonomy, property rights, and religious freedom. Scroll.in in its report published on April 6, 2025 highlighted that the abolition of the “Waqf by User” doctrine and repeal of Section 40 are seen as direct threats to community-held spaces that lack documentation, especially in rural or marginalized regions. Legal experts argue that the burden of proof now shifts unfairly onto poor communities that may not have had the means to retain historical land records.

As pointed out by Al-Jazeera in its detailed report on April 7, 2025, perhaps most controversially, the provision allowing non-Muslims to serve on Waqf Boards is perceived as a violation of Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantee freedom of religion and the right to manage religious affairs independently. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and other Islamic organizations have publicly denounced this clause, calling it a dangerous precedent.

Another concern lies in the expanded powers of the District Collector. By centralizing decision-making within the state machinery, many fear that land disputes involving Waqf properties will become more susceptible to political interference-especially in communally sensitive regions.

Political analysts as per BBC News report published on April 8, 2025 remain divided on the underlying motivations of the Act. Some view it as a smokescreen to distract from India’s ongoing economic challenges. Others argue it aligns with a broader Hindutva agenda aimed at integrating, or diluting, minority-led institutions. The choice to label the act UMEED, meaning “hope,” has been called “bitterly ironic” by Muslim scholars who see it as mere symbolism concealing a deeper structural exclusion.

Constitutional experts expect that the Act will face judicial scrutiny in the Supreme Court. The primary legal question will be whether the state can lawfully intervene in religious endowments without infringing on Articles 25 to 28, which enshrine the right to practice and manage religion freely. The inclusion of non-Muslims in religious boards may also be contested on grounds of violating the right to religious autonomy.

While some moderate Muslim voices agree that Waqf institutions are overdue for reform, they insist that the process should come from within the community, not be imposed externally. Others worry that this may serve as a template for the government to intervene in other religious trusts as well, thereby unsettling India’s pluralistic fabric.

The timing and context of the Waqf Amendment Act cannot be ignored. Coming in the final year of Modi’s second term, alongside legislation like CAA and the Ram Mandir judgment, it fits a broader pattern of reshaping India’s secular character. The law may not be about reform but control-curtailing the autonomy of Islamic institutions and sowing legal confusion around Muslim property rights. As Prof. Faizan Mustafa, a noted legal scholar, told The Wire, “This is not about governance. This is about eroding the community’s infrastructure under the guise of reform.”

The Waqf Amendment Act 2025 sits at the intersection of governance reform and identity politics. While the need for reform is evident-given widespread mismanagement-the method adopted raises serious concerns about overreach and marginalization. Against the backdrop of other contentious policies like the CAA and the revocation of Article 370, this Act adds to the growing anxiety among Indian Muslims about their future in a changing republic. Whether the courts uphold or strike down parts of the Act, the socio-political fallout is likely to be long-lasting.