The Waqf (Amendment) Act and its Implications for Minority Rights in India

Post by: IPRR
July 26, 2025
No Comment

Bhavya Bhav^[1]

^[1] Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Tirupati, Email ID: HS24M106@IITTP.AC.IN

Title:	The Waqf (Amendment) Act and its Implications for Minority Rights in India
Author(s):	Bhavya Bhav
Keywords:	Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025, Minority Rights, Religious Autonomy, Islamic Endowments
Issue Date:	25 July 2025
Publisher:	IMPRI Impact and Policy Research Institute
Abstract:	The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, introduces sweeping reforms to the administration of Islamic endowments in India, aiming to enhance transparency, digitize records, and improve institutional efficiency. However, the Act has ignited controversy for provisions that critics argue undermine minority rights and religious autonomy. Key concerns include the inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf Boards, the application of the Limitation Act to Waqf properties, and changes to traditional practices like “Waqf by User.” While the government promotes the Act as a modernization effort, legal experts and community leaders warn that it may erode constitutional protections and interfere with the self-governance of Muslim institutions. This paper examines the implications of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, focusing on its proposed reforms and the ensuing debate over minority rights, religious autonomy, and constitutional protections.
Page(s):	9-15
URL:	https://iprr.impriindia.com/the-waqf-amendment-act-and-its-implications-for-minority-rights-in-india/
ISSN:	2583-3464 (Online)
PDF Link:	https://iprr.impriindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/PP1-The-Waqf-Amendment-Act-and-its-Implications-for-Minority-Rights-in-India_-Bhavya-Bhav-IPRR-V4I1-Jan-June-2025-3.pdf

(January-June 2025) Volume 4, Issue 1 | 25th July 2024
ISSN: 2583-3464 (Online)

PDF

Introduction

Waqf^[1], a pivotal institution in Islamic philanthropy, refers to the permanent dedication of property for religious, charitable, or pious purposes, and is deeply rooted in Islamic tradition and legal interpretation. Historically, Waqf has played a vital role in supporting educational, religious, and social welfare initiatives within the Muslim community. In India, the legal framework governing Waqf has evolved significantly, from colonial-era judgments like Abdul Fata Mahomed Ishak v. Russomoy Dhur (1894)^[2] to the enactment of the Waqf Act, 1995^[3], and its subsequent amendments. The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, represents a major shift in this legal landscape.

Introduced with the stated aim of improving transparency, digitalizing Waqf records, and enhancing administrative efficiency, the Act proposes sweeping reforms such as redefining Waqf, centralizing registration, and increasing state oversight. However, the Act has also drawn criticism for its perceived political and communal undertones. Key objections include the nomination of non-Muslims to Waqf Boards, the exclusion of non-Muslims from donating to Waqfs, and changes to the foundational definitions of Waqf. These provisions have sparked concerns about the government’s intentions and the broader implications for minority rights and religious autonomy in a secular, pluralistic democracy like India.

The relevance of this topic lies in the significant role Waqf plays in Islamic philanthropy and its impact on social welfare in India. In this paper, I will analyze the implications of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, focusing on its potential effects on transparency, administrative efficiency, and the broader concerns regarding religious autonomy, minority rights, and the communal undertones associated with the proposed reforms.

Literature Review

The Waqf system, a foundational component of Islamic socio-religious life, has historically functioned as a mechanism for sustaining community welfare, particularly through the support of religious, educational, and charitable institutions. Waqf’s practice is drawn from prophetic traditions and the early Islamic legal canon, where it is understood as an irrevocable dedication of property to a pious purpose.

In India, the trajectory of Waqf jurisprudence^[4] is marked by a complex interplay of colonial, post-colonial, and modern legal interventions. During British rule, the Mussalman Waqf Validating Acts of 1913^{^[5]} and 1930^{^[6]} sought to recognize family Waqfs and maintain their charitable character, despite colonial skepticism over Islamic property law. These Acts were instrumental in laying the groundwork for formal state recognition and regulation of Waqf institutions.

After independence, the Indian state introduced the Waqf Act of 1954^{^[7]}, institutionalizing State Waqf Boards to oversee the administration of Waqf properties. The establishment of the Central Waqf Council^[8] in 1964 aimed to centralize supervision and provide advisory functions. Over the years, governance reforms continued through various amendments, culminating in the comprehensive Waqf Act of 1995, which remains the cornerstone of Waqf regulation today. This Act introduced tribunals for Waqf-related disputes, defined the role of mutawallis (custodians), and codified rules for the functioning of state and central Waqf institutions.

The 2013 Amendment to the Waqf Act expanded protections, notably including a ban on the sale of Waqf properties, mandating female representation in Waqf Boards, and enabling long-term leases for better economic use of Waqf land. Despite these efforts, endemic issues such as bureaucratic inefficiencies, legal ambiguities, corruption, encroachments, and non-utilization of assets have persisted. Scholars and legal analysts have emphasized that mere legal reforms are insufficient without respecting the theological underpinnings and constitutional protections accorded to religious minorities.

Contemporary critiques of the Waqf legislation highlight a growing trend toward state centralization and interference in religious affairs, which some view as a potential erosion of Article 26^[9] of the Indian Constitution. This article grants every religious denomination the right to manage its own affairs in matters of religion. Analysts such as MR Shamshad and Talha Abdul Rehman argue that the increasing bureaucratization and state oversight of Waqf properties conflict with the constitutional guarantee of religious self-governance, especially for the Muslim minority. These concerns frame the broader debate surrounding the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, and its implications for legal pluralism and minority rights in India.

Data and Methodology

This research adopts a qualitative and doctrinal legal methodology, focusing on the interpretation and critical analysis of legislative texts, constitutional provisions, and scholarly commentaries.

Data Sources

Primary Sources:

The full text of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025
Relevant statutes including the Waqf Act, 1995, the Limitation Act, 1963^[10], and historical laws such as the Mussalman Wakf Validating Acts
Provisions of the Indian Constitution, particularly Article 26

Secondary Sources:

Legal commentary and expert opinions published in law journals and public forums.
Interviews and published views of legal experts.
Reports and press releases from the Central Waqf Council and other policy think tanks.

Methodological Approach:

The study involves a comparative analysis of pre- and post-amendment legal frameworks to identify structural and functional shifts in Waqf governance. The research also uses constitutional hermeneutics to evaluate whether the Act aligns with or violates minority rights enshrined in the Constitution. In addition, a content analysis of the Act’s language was conducted to assess the degree of administrative control, definitional clarity, and regulatory mechanisms proposed. The interpretation of the Act’s provisions is contextualized within broader debates on secularism, religious autonomy, and state intervention.

Results & Discussion^[11]:

The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, introduces a range of structural reforms aimed at modernizing Waqf administration. While the government claims the Act targets inefficiencies and legal loopholes, the provisions raise significant concerns among community leaders, legal scholars, and human rights advocates. The results of the analysis are:

Legal Clarity and Property Classification

One of the Act’s notable provisions is the separation of trusts from Waqf. Muslim individuals can now create religious or charitable trusts under other laws without these automatically being classified as Waqf, preserving private control. While this is intended to avoid overreach by Waqf Boards, it also creates a dual legal regime that may confuse ownership claims and blur jurisdictional lines.

The application of the Limitation Act, 1963 to Waqf disputes is another contentious change. Traditionally, Waqf is considered an irrevocable dedication in perpetuity, making limitation periods inapplicable. Applying limitation periods could invalidate historical claims, undermining the spiritual and legal status of Waqf as a permanent trust.

Technology and Governance Reforms

A significant reform is the establishment of the Central Waqf Portal, requiring the digitization of all Waqf property records. Mutawallis must register property details within six months, facilitating real-time tracking of usage, audits, and litigation. This digital shift promotes transparency, but it also raises concerns about accessibility for under-resourced Waqf institutions and communities in rural or underdeveloped regions.

The Act mandates annual audits for Waqf institutions with income exceeding ₹100,000 to prevent financial mismanagement. It also reduces annual contributions from 7% to 5%, potentially freeing up funds for community services.

Institutional Autonomy and Representation

The inclusion of two non-Muslim members in both State and Central Waqf Boards has triggered a strong backlash. Critics argue that Waqf is a religious institution, and its governance should reflect Islamic jurisprudence and community norms. The move is perceived as undermining community autonomy, particularly when viewed alongside restrictions on non-Muslim donations to Waqf—a contradiction that underscores concerns about selective inclusion.

The restructuring of Waqf Tribunals, with fixed tenures and the appointment of secretary-level government officials, has also been criticized. Legal scholars view this as diluting judicial independence and replacing community expertise with bureaucratic control.

Gender and Social Equity

The Act takes a progressive stance by reinforcing women’s rights in Waqf contexts. It ensures that female heirs receive their legal inheritance before a Waqf dedication is accepted and includes protections for widows, orphans, and divorced women. These reforms are commendable in aligning Islamic charitable practices with contemporary human rights standards.

Customary Practices and Religious Tradition

Perhaps the most culturally sensitive provision is the restriction on “Waqf by User”—the recognition of Waqf through informal, long-standing public use of property. Historically validated under Islamic law and Indian precedent, its removal or dilution is seen as eroding community traditions and oral histories of religious endowment. Critics argue that formal registration cannot replace centuries of customary practice in defining religious spaces.

Therefore, it becomes clear that reforming religious institutions in a secular democracy is a delicate balance between improving efficiency and respecting the cultural, theological, and constitutional dimensions of minority practices. The Act exposes tensions between modernization and tradition, especially when legal reforms overlook community sentiments and historical context. While digitization and accountability are necessary, they must be implemented with community consultation and respect for religious autonomy under Article 26 of the Constitution. This case also illustrates the broader issue of state-centralization in religious affairs, which, if unchecked, can erode the pluralistic and decentralized ethos of India’s secular framework.

Conclusion

The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, presents a complex interplay of modernization efforts and contested interventions in religious autonomy. From the government’s perspective, the Act is framed as a necessary step towards enhancing transparency, curbing corruption, and improving governance in the Waqf sector. Key reforms such as the digitization of property records through a Central Waqf Portal, mandatory audits for financially significant institutions, and a reduction in the mandatory contribution from Waqf incomes are positioned as mechanisms to strengthen institutional efficiency and ensure better utilization of endowment assets for community welfare. Additionally, progressive elements like reinforced protections for women’s inheritance rights and social safeguards for vulnerable groups are highlighted as efforts to align Islamic philanthropy with contemporary standards of social justice.

On the other hand, critics contend that the Act threatens the constitutional rights of religious minorities, particularly the Muslim community, by introducing provisions that are seen as intrusive and inconsistent with the spiritual foundations of Waqf. The inclusion of non-Muslim members in Waqf Boards and the exclusion of non-Muslims from donating to Waqfs have been flagged as contradictory and politically motivated. The application of the Limitation Act to Waqf properties is perceived as undermining the concept of perpetual religious endowment, potentially invalidating longstanding community claims. Moreover, critics view the abolition or dilution of “Waqf by User” as a disregard for customary religious practices, weakening the historical and communal basis upon which many Waqfs were established. The increasing bureaucratization of Waqf governance, particularly through tribunal restructuring and heightened state oversight, is further seen as a departure from Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs.

Through this analysis, it becomes evident that while the Act attempts to rectify systemic inefficiencies and bring technological and administrative reforms, it does so at the cost of raising serious questions about the preservation of religious identity, autonomy, and constitutional safeguards. A balanced approach that incorporates community consultation, respects theological traditions, and upholds constitutional values is essential to ensure that modernization does not become a vehicle for marginalization.

References

ABVP. (n.d.). Waqf: History and evolution. Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad. https://www.abvp.org/article/Waqf-history-and-evolution

Central Waqf Council. (n.d.). Home. https://centralWaqfcouncil.gov.in/

iPleaders. (n.d.). Concept of Waqf under Muslim Law. iPleaders. https://blog.ipleaders.in/concept-Waqf-muslim-law/

Ministry of Minority Affairs. (n.d.). Report on Waqf properties and management in India [PDF] https://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in/WriteReadData/RTF1984/1743661603.pdf

Ministry of Minority Affairs. (n.d.). Waqf development and management policy [PDF]. https://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in/WriteReadData/RTF1984/1743661419.pdf

Mondaq. (2024, December 28). Waqf in India: Evolution, laws, challenges & Waqf Amendment Act 2024. https://www.mondaq.com/india/real-estate/1539008/Waqf-in-india-evolution-laws-challenges-Waqf-amendment-Act-2024

Press Information Bureau. (2025, April). Waqf Amendment Act 2025: Objectives and Key Provisions [PDF] https://static.pib.gov.in/WriteReadData/specificdocs/documents/2025/apr/doc202543532501.pdf

The Milli Gazette. (n.d.). Challenges around Waqf in India. https://www.milligazette.com/news/6-issues/34121-challenges-around-Waqf-in-india/

Times of India. (2025, April 4). What is Waqf Amendment Act? All you need to know. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/what-is-Waqf-amendment-Act-all-you-need-to-know/articleshow/119890366.cms

^[1] Waqf Concept

^[2] Abdul Fata Mahomed Ishak v. Russomoy Dhur (1894)