Overview of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024

 Understanding Waqf and Its Significance

Waqf refers to a religious endowment in Islamic law where a Muslim dedicates a property or asset for religious or charitable purposes. The property, once declared as waqf, becomes inalienable — it cannot be sold, gifted, or inherited. Typically, such properties include mosques, graveyards, educational institutions, and agricultural or commercial land. The revenues generated are often used for community welfare.

In India, waqf properties are managed by State Waqf Boards and overseen by the Central Waqf Council, which operates under the Ministry of Minority Affairs. As of 2022, India had over 8 lakh registered waqf properties, making it one of the largest repositories of Islamic charitable real estate globally.

Overview of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024

Passed in April 2024 by the Lok Sabha (Lower House), the Waqf (Amendment) Bill introduces changes to the Waqf Act, 1995, and has been rebranded as the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development (UWMEED) Act, 1995.

Key Provisions:

Inclusion of Non-Muslims in Waqf Boards:

One of the most debated provisions allows the inclusion of non-Muslims in both the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards.

The government argues that this promotes transparency and inclusivity, ensuring that the boards are not managed as exclusive religious clubs but public bodies accountable to the people.

Mandatory Inclusion of Women:

The bill mandates the presence of at least two Muslim women in the Central Waqf Council, marking a progressive step for gender representation in religious bodies.

Special Boards for Sectarian Groups:

Provisions have been made for separate boards for Bohra and Agakhani communities, recognizing their distinct sectarian identity and waqf traditions.

Verification of Waqf Properties:

The Act empowers the government to verify and determine the validity of waqf declarations. If a property is found to have been declared waqf without proper ownership records, it can be excluded from the waqf register.

Name Change and Broader Mandate:

The rebranding to the UWMEED Act signals a broader, development-oriented mandate, with a focus on efficient use of waqf assets.

Government’s Justification: A Push for Reform

Union Minister Kiren Rijiju, who introduced the bill, stated that the purpose was not to interfere in religious practices but to ensure that waqf properties are managed in a transparent, inclusive, and corruption-free manner. He noted that for decades, there have been allegations of mismanagement, illegal encroachments, and underutilization of valuable waqf lands.

The inclusion of non-Muslim members, according to the minister, was necessary because the management of these properties affects people of all communities, especially in urban areas where waqf lands are leased or rented.

The bill, Rijiju claimed, is part of a larger push to modernize India’s religious endowments, make their management efficient, and ensure the welfare of marginalized Muslim communities.

Opposition’s Concerns: Threat to Religious Autonomy?

The bill has faced severe opposition from political parties like the Congress, TMC, AIMIM, DMK, and various Muslim organizations including the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB).

Their main objections include:

Violation of Religious Freedom:

Critics argue that the waqf system is a religious institution, and allowing non-Muslims to sit on waqf boards is akin to state intrusion into Islamic religious affairs.

AIMPLB has called it a blatant violation of Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs.

Fear of Land Seizure:

Many fear that this amendment could be used as a tool to challenge waqf properties without formal documentation, which is common for centuries-old endowments, potentially paving the way for government takeover of these lands.

Communal Polarization:

Critics accuse the bill of being politically motivated, aimed at marginalizing the Muslim community and undermining their institutions in the run-up to elections.

Unconstitutional Amendments:

Opposition leaders have vowed to challenge the bill in the Supreme Court, arguing it infringes upon constitutional safeguards provided to religious minorities.

What Are Waqf Properties Worth?

This debate becomes even more charged when one looks at the economic value of waqf lands:

According to the Sachar Committee Report (2006), waqf properties in India are worth over Rs. 1.2 lakh crore.

However, most of them are underutilized or encroached upon, generating barely 1% of their potential revenue.

Modernizing waqf boards, therefore, has long been a topic of interest — but the approach remains controversial.

Legal and Constitutional Challenges Ahead

Legal experts anticipate constitutional challenges, particularly concerning the inclusion of non-Muslims in religious administrative bodies. The Supreme Court, in previous judgments, has upheld the right of religious communities to manage their own religious institutions.

If the opposition follows through with its petition, this bill could become another landmark constitutional case testing the balance between state regulation and religious freedom.

The Political Angle

Politically, the bill appears to play into the BJP’s broader narrative of “uniformity in governance” across religious institutions, mirroring similar efforts like scrutiny of temple trusts in various states or crackdowns on madrasas.

At the same time, it has given the opposition a rallying point to unify Muslim voters who may view this as an attack on their religious rights.

Conclusion: A Fork in the Road

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024 sits at the intersection of religion, politics, and law. Whether it's viewed as a necessary reform or an unjust overreach depends largely on one's perspective. For the government, it's a step toward accountability and modernization. For critics, it's a dangerous precedent of state interference in religious matters.

What’s certain is that the bill has opened a crucial national conversation — one that will likely continue in the courtrooms, in Parliament, and in the public sphere for months to come.