Waqf Bill: The Shrinking Freedom in India
India, a country boasting of its pluralism and constitutional protection of religious freedom, is witnessing growing concerns among its Muslim citizens regarding the curtailment of religious autonomy. The recently proposed amendments to the Waqf Act 1995 have stirred significant debate over the future of waqf properties and the rights of religious minorities to manage their sacred endowments. The bill renames the 1995 Waqf Act and calls it the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act. This article delves into the implications of the new Waqf bill, focusing on its legal, historical, and socio-political dimensions.
Understanding Waqf and the 1995 Act
A waqf is an inalienable charitable endowment under Islamic law, typically involving property donated for religious or charitable purposes such as mosques, madrasas, graveyards, orphanages, or community welfare. Once a property is declared as waqf, it becomes irrevocable and cannot be sold or transferred. The Waqf Act of 1995 was enacted to provide a legal framework for the management of waqf properties in India. It established State Waqf Boards and Waqf Tribunals to handle administrative matters and resolve disputes internally.
Historically, many properties that came under waqf were not registered through formal documentation. Instead, they were donated through oral declarations, customary usage, or long-standing communal recognition. Over generations, their status as waqf was accepted both socially and functionally, even without paper proof.
The New Waqf Amendment Bill: Key Provisions
The recently introduced bill marks a significant shift from this historical and cultural approach. The following major changes are proposed:
1. Mandatory Documentation to Prove Waqf Status
The most controversial provision of the bill requires Waqf Boards to furnish valid and formal documentation to prove that a property is indeed a waqf. This significantly disregards historical oral declarations or community use, which were accepted under earlier interpretations and practices.
This has raised alarms, especially for properties whose origins date back centuries when land transfers and donations were often unwritten. If the required documentation is missing, such properties risk losing their waqf status and being appropriated by the government.
Further compounding the concern, in case of dispute, especially over land that the government claims to be state-owned, the bill proposes that the final authority to decide the ownership lies with the government itself, not the waqf board or tribunal.
2. Inclusion of Non-Muslims in Waqf Boards and Tribunals
Traditionally, waqf institutions have been managed exclusively by Muslims, in line with the Islamic legal principle that only Muslims can oversee religious endowments meant for Muslim causes. However, the new bill proposes the appointment of non-Muslims to waqf boards and judicial tribunals handling waqf matters.
This is seen by many as an intrusion into religious autonomy, as it potentially allows individuals unfamiliar with Islamic endowment laws and sensitivities to influence decisions on Muslim religious property. Critics argue that this undermines the constitutional guarantees of minority rights and religious self-governance provided under Article 26 of the Indian Constitution.
3. Judicial Intervention Over Tribunal Decisions
Earlier, decisions by Waqf Tribunals were considered final and binding, with very limited scope for challenge. The new amendment removes this finality and allows for judicial review and intervention by civil courts.
While this provision can be seen as aligning with the broader principles of legal oversight and appeal, it may also open the floodgates to prolonged litigation, where waqf properties could be dragged into courts for years, resulting in loss of utility, misuse, or state takeovers.
Implications for the Muslim Community
The cumulative effect of these amendments is being viewed by many as a form of institutional marginalisation of Muslims in India. With the state taking greater control over waqf matters and demanding bureaucratic proofs for religiously sensitive assets, there is growing fear that many waqf properties could be lost forever, especially those lacking legal documentation.
Furthermore, the move to dilute Muslim representation on waqf boards is seen as another step toward eroding the autonomy of religious minorities. Given the increasing number of waqf properties already entangled in legal or bureaucratic disputes, these new provisions could worsen an already fragile situation.
Case Study: Babari Masjid – A Waqf Property Lost
One of the most significant and controversial examples of waqf property appropriation in India is the Babari Masjid in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh. Built in 1528 during the Mughal era, the mosque was a registered waqf property and had served as a place of worship for centuries.
Despite this status, it became the center of a communal and political storm, culminating in the illegal demolition of the mosque by a mob in 1992, while state machinery stood by. This act was widely condemned as an attack on secularism, rule of law, and minority rights. The mosque’s destruction remains one of the darkest chapters in modern Indian history.
In the decades that followed, the legal battle shifted from determining who committed the illegality to deciding who should get the land. Eventually, in 2019, the Supreme Court awarded the disputed land to Hindu claimants, citing faith and continuity of belief — even while acknowledging that the demolition of the mosque was unlawful and that the Muslim side had not failed legally in proving its case.
The Muslim community was allocated a separate 5-acre plot elsewhere for the construction of a new mosque. However, for many, this felt less like justice and more like compensation for a loss inflicted by force and later legitimized.
This case illustrates the fragile status of waqf properties and how, without effective protection, they can be subject to illegal occupation, communal pressure, and eventual legal loss — regardless of historical legitimacy or religious significance.
In the context of the new Waqf Amendment Bill, the Babari Masjid episode serves as a warning. If even well-documented and historically significant waqf properties like Babri Masjid can be taken over, what future lies ahead for hundreds of undocumented or community-acknowledged waqf lands under a regime demanding formal proof and government validation?
Great — let’s expand the article by adding a few more examples and responses from Muslim organizations, scholars, and activists to show how the community is reacting and how the pattern of waqf property erosion is already visible across India.
Other Notable Examples of Waqf Property Encroachments
1. Gyanvapi Mosque, Varanasi
The Gyanvapi Mosque, located adjacent to the Kashi Vishwanath temple in Varanasi, is another historically significant waqf property under increasing threat. Hindu petitioners claim it was built over a temple, and legal proceedings are ongoing to “survey” the mosque premises. This has led to serious concerns that, like Babri Masjid, historical narrative and religious sentiment may override waqf protections and lead to dispossession.
The mosque is a registered waqf property, yet its status is now vulnerable due to repeated court interventions, surveys, and public mobilizations. Many fear that the outcome may mirror that of the Babri Masjid case, setting a dangerous precedent.
2. Eidgah Maidan, Karnataka
In Bengaluru, the Eidgah Maidan in Chamarajpet — used by Muslims for Eid prayers for over 200 years — was recently declared a “disputed property” by the state government. Local Muslim organizations provided waqf records and usage history, but Hindu groups began staking claim over the land for religious events. The BBMP (municipal authority) briefly took control, but intense public pressure and legal recourse paused the encroachment.
This incident underlines how even well-documented waqf land used for active religious practices can come under threat from political mobilization and administrative ambiguity.
Reactions from Muslim Organizations and Civil Society
All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB)
The AIMPLB has strongly opposed the new Waqf Amendment Bill. In a recent statement, the Board said:
“The government is attempting to interfere in religious matters through legislation. Waqf is an Islamic institution, and bringing in non-Muslims into its administration violates the spirit of religious freedom guaranteed under the Constitution.”
They also warned that demanding proof of ownership for centuries-old properties is “unjust and impractical,” especially given that many such donations occurred orally or through local customs under previous regimes, including during Mughal and British periods.
Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind
The Jamiat has also expressed deep concern, calling the bill an attempt to dilute Muslim control over their religious institutions and a precursor to land-grabbing.
“Instead of protecting waqf properties, the government is making it easier to challenge and seize them,” said a senior Jamiat leader.
Indian Muslim Intellectual Forum
Academics and legal experts from this platform highlighted how minority institutions are slowly losing autonomy in areas of education, religion, and property rights.
“First it was educational institutions, then Personal Law, and now even Waqf is under threat. This pattern indicates a systematic centralization of control over Muslim identity and resources,” noted one expert.
Conclusion: A Deepening Crisis of Trust
The new Waqf Amendment Bill, when seen in the broader context of Babri Masjid, Gyanvapi, and the Chamarajpet Eidgah, represents not just a policy change, but a shift in the state’s relationship with minority rights. The increasing ability of the government to override waqf protections, insert itself into religious boards, and demand documentation from centuries past leaves the Muslim community feeling vulnerable, excluded, and targeted.
While the government claims that the new bill brings transparency and legal accountability, its implications suggest a deeper shift — one that may redefine the balance between state authority and religious freedom in India.
At stake is not just the fate of ancient properties but the very principle of minority rights and religious autonomy. As the Indian democracy navigates its plural identity, the treatment of waqf institutions will serve as a critical test of its commitment to constitutional secularism and inclusive governance.
If the concerns of the Muslim community are not addressed through meaningful consultation and safeguards, the Waqf Amendment Bill may be remembered not for reform, but for repression in the name of regulation.
Summary
Waqf Bill: Shrinking Freedoms in India
Infographic Summary
What is Waqf?
- A charitable endowment under Islamic law
- Properties donated for mosques, madrasas, graveyards, and community welfare
- Historically recognized through oral declarations and community usage, not always documented
Waqf Act 1995 (Original Framework)
- Allowed customary or oral declarations to validate waqf
- Waqf Boards managed the properties
- Waqf Tribunals had the final say in property disputes
Key Changes in the New Waqf Amendment Bill
- Documentation Now Mandatory
Waqf Boards must provide official legal documents to validate any waqf claim. Oral or traditional use is no longer sufficient. - Final Authority Lies with Government
In disputes, especially with state-owned land, the government has the final decision—not the Waqf Board or Tribunal. - Non-Muslim Members Allowed on Waqf Boards
The bill permits the appointment of non-Muslims to Waqf Boards and Tribunals—breaking with the tradition of Muslim-only oversight. - Judicial Review Introduced
Decisions of Waqf Tribunals can now be challenged in civil courts, ending their previous finality.
Real-World Examples
- Babri Masjid (Ayodhya)
A registered waqf property, demolished in 1992. Despite being acknowledged as unlawfully destroyed, the land was handed over to Hindu groups in 2019. - Gyanvapi Mosque (Varanasi)
Registered waqf site under legal threat based on historical claims; facing surveys and litigation. - Chamarajpet Eidgah (Bengaluru)
Used for Eid prayers for over 200 years, recently declared “disputed” and claimed for other religious use.
Responses from Muslim Organizations
- All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB)
Condemned the bill as unconstitutional interference in religious matters. - Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind
Warned the bill facilitates government takeover of Muslim lands. - Muslim scholars and activists
See this as part of a larger pattern weakening religious minorities’ autonomy in education, personal law, and property.
Why It Matters
- Undermines centuries-old religious institutions
- Disenfranchises a religious minority’s right to manage its sacred endowments
- Risks loss of undocumented waqf properties across India
- Signals a shift away from constitutional secularism toward majoritarian control
Conclusion
The Waqf Amendment Bill, while presented as reform, may result in greater state control, loss of religious autonomy, and legal marginalization of India’s Muslim community. It raises urgent questions about secularism, minority rights, and the future of communal harmony in the country.
Word Count: 1950 words
