We believe in real service, not lip service: Nadda
* Legislation unconstitutional, says Kharge
NEW DELHI, Apr 3:
Parliament early Friday passed the contentious Waqf (Amendment) bill, 2025, after it was approved by the Rajya Sabha.
The Lok Sabha had on Thursday approved the Bill after over a 12-hour debate.
In Rajya Sabha, the Bill got 128 votes in its favour and 95 against after all the amendments moved by the opposition were rejected.
Follow the Daily Excelsior channel on WhatsApp
In the lower house, the bill was supported by 288 MPs while 232 voted against it.
According to the Waqf (Amendment) bill, Waqf tribunals will be strengthened, a structured selection process will be maintained, and a tenure will be fixed to ensure efficient dispute resolution.
As per the Bill, while Waqf institutions’ mandatory contribution to Waqf boards is reduced from 7 per cent to 5 per cent, Waqf institutions earning over Rs 1 lakh will undergo audits by state-sponsored auditors.
A centralised portal will automate Waqf property management, improving efficiency and transparency.
The Bill proposes that practising Muslims (for at least five years) can dedicate their property to the Waqf, restoring pre-2013 rules.
It stipulates that women must receive their inheritance before the Waqf declaration, with special provisions for widows, divorced women and orphans.
The Bill proposes that an officer above the rank of collector investigate government properties claimed as Waqf.
It also proposes that non-Muslim members be included in the central and state Waqf boards for inclusivity. Click here to watch video
Earlier, Leader of the House in the Rajya Sabha J P Nadda accused the Congress of making Muslim women second-grade citizens during its rule at the Centre.
Participating in a debate on the Waqf (Amendment) bill in the Upper House of Parliament, the BJP leader said the Narendra Modi Government brought Muslim women into the mainstream by banning the practice of triple talaq.
“You made the Indian Muslim ladies second-grade citizens,” Nadda said, referring to the Congress party and added, “It was only India where Muslim women were not brought into the mainstream.”
While triple talaq was banned in Muslim countries such as Egypt, Sudan, Bangladesh, and Syria several years ago, the Congress-led UPA government did nothing for Muslim women while it was in power for a decade.
“We believe in real service, not lip service. Today crores of Muslim sisters have the right to live with dignity. Who did it? Isn’t the decision a historic one? It is a historic decision and none other than Prime Minister Modi has done it,” Nadda said.
“I stand in support of the (Waqf) bill as its sole purpose is to bring reforms in managing the Waqf properties,” Nadda said emphasising that the current amendment in the Bill tries to fix accountability.
Nadda asserted that the Waqf (Amendment) bill is in the nation’s interest and the opposition is trying to derail and divert the issue.
Drawing a comparison between the Joint Parliamentary Committees constituted to suggest amendments, Nadda said the current government formed a 31-member committee while the UPA had a 13-member JPC.
Similarly, he said, 284 stakeholders participated in the debate this time, while only 18 debated during the UPA’s dispensation. This shows that Modi is moving the country forward on the basis of democratic principles.
Union Minister Kiren Rijiju attacked senior Rajya Sabha members for creating confusion and raising issues in the House but not staying back to listen to the replies of ministers concerned.
Rijiju was referring to the comments made by independent MP Kapil Sibal who raised to oppose the bill.
The minister said that Sibal has created confusion on the bill by comparing properties of Waqf bodies with those of other religious bodies.
During the discussion on The Waqf (Amendment) bill 2025, Sibal opposed the proposed legislation and said that there were also rights for non-Muslims to make Waqf.
“When it is my land then who are you to make law for that,” he said.
He mentioned the different high court judgements before independence upheld, making Waqf even by Hindus and in some cases for welfare of Muslims like giving land for graveyard (by Hindus). He noted that there are 32 Waqf boards in different states.
He mentioned that there are over 10 lakh acres of land in Hindu (religious) institutions in four states. “In Hindu religion, the self-acquired property can be given to sons and not daughters,” he said.
He asked to change the law to give rights in self-acquired property to daughters also.
He urged the government to bring law to give effect to this. He told the House that earlier there was unauthorised encroachment on Waqf property and even the government acquired the property.
“You brought the 12-year law (which provides that anybody in possession of property for 12 years or more is the owner),” he said.
Rijiju intervened and objected to the wrong comparison of religious land of Hindus in four states with that of Muslims.
He also expressed dismay over raising issues by senior members in the House who never stay back to listen to the reply on the debate by the concerned minister.
Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman mentioned that the government appoints the officials to manage these religious bodies which manage these properties (Hindu).
Sibal said that he was making the same point that these properties are maintained by the government. “Waqf property belongs to God and cannot be sold. It can be donated for graveyards, schools etc. Once the land is donated it cannot be taken back,” he said.
Addressing Sibal, Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar said he has given different legal explanations to him.
Dhankhar said that self-acquired property can be given to sons, daughters or anyone else as this is the law of the land.
Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge said the government is trying to sow the seeds of conflict by suppressing Muslims through the Waqf (Amendment) bill and appealed to the ruling party not to disturb peace and harmony in the country.
Kharge, also the Congress president, said the legislation is “unconstitutional” and is not good for the Indian Muslims. He urged the government to withdraw the bill which has a lot of “mistakes” and not make it a prestige issue.
He also accused the NDA government of trying to create trouble for the Muslim community and the bill seeks to destroy them by usurping their properties.
Kharge alleged that the ruling dispensation wants to take away the land of Muslims and hand it over to its corporate friends.
He accused the government of failing to utilise funds earmarked for the minorities even though it is talking about poor Muslims and Pasmanda Muslims.
Kharge also alleged that ever since the BJP-led NDA government came to power, Rs 3,574 crore out of a total of Rs 18,274 crore allocated for minorities was returned as the amount remained unspent.
He urged Home Minister Amit Shah to withdraw the bill.
“I appeal to the home minister to kindly withdraw the bill. Don’t make it an issue of prestige. If there are errors and mistakes why don’t you correct them?” he said.
“We have peace and harmony in this country. You please maintain that and you don’t try to disturb that,” he added.
Kharge said the Waqf bill is meant to ” harass” the minorities. Had it been changed from the 1995 Act, we would have accepted it. There is nothing in the bill and people are opposing it, he added.
He said the BJP had accepted the 1995 Act and there was no need for bringing amendments with clauses aiming to “afflict people with problems”.
Earlier participating in the debate, Kerala Congress (M) leader Jose K Mani by and large opposed the bill but acknowledged the positive provision that allows the Waqf board decision to be challenged in the court of law but demanded the government to make it retrospective.
Citing the Munambam case in Kerala, he said around 610 families belonging to various religions now face the threat of losing their lands due to Waqf claims. These communities lived peacefully with legally registered land and paid legitimate taxes to the government.
P P Suneer (CPI) opposed the bill, saying “it is an assault on secularism and equality.”
“By taking away the key legal protection and centralising controls, the bill paves the way for state interference in religious endowments, violating many fundamental rights,” he said.
Vaiko (MDMK) opposed the bill and said it is an “obnoxious, anti-federal, anti-democratic and anti-secular bill. It should be withdrawn.”
The bill proposed major changes in governance and regulation of Waqf board. “We strongly oppose the anti-minority bill. It is divisive and the anti-Muslim agenda was obvious. What was so obvious was the bringing of the Waqf administration from the state to the central government. Unfortunately, this aspect has gone unnoticed,” he said.
K R Suresh Reddy (BRS) opposed the bill and said 75 per cent of the content of the bill can be done through an administrative process and there is no need for the bill.
“The content of the bill is good, but intent is doubtful. This is what everyone is discussing. A good facade is been created. Behind this facade, a polarisation is attempted,” he said.
Sushmita Dev (TMC) said, “The bill reeks of mistrust.”
A managing trustee of the Waqf board can be removed from his position on the grounds if he is a member of the organisation which is banned under UAPA, she said, adding that the bill is unconstitutional.
Imran Pratapgarhi (Congress) said, “This bill is not a ray of hope. The majority of citizens are doubtful that the effort is to take away the property and give it to the rich.”
Congress MP Syed Naseer Hussain termed the proposed legislation “unconstitutional” and alleged that it targets the Muslim community.
He also accused the BJP of using the proposed legislation to trigger communal tension and polarisation in the society in order to strengthen its vote bank.
Hussain accused the ruling BJP of trying to mislead the country and claimed no recommendations made by opposition members to the joint parliamentary committee (JPC) formed to look into the Bill were included in it.
He alleged that the Bill seeks to treat Muslims as “second-class” citizens in the country.
Hussain also noted that the BJP-led government is trying to bulldoze the legislation in the Upper House.
Manoj Jha of RJD said the content and intent of the Bill puts a question mark on the government. He also said the government should send the Bill to the select committee of Parliament once again.
Jha alleged that the Bill is like “dog whistle politics” to alienate the Muslims from the mainstream.
Participating in the debate, Samajwadi Party MP Ram Gopal Yadav emphasised that all the religions must be treated with respect and the government must prevent India “shifting towards a totalitarian state”.
He said India has a huge population of minorities, especially Muslims and if a large section of people feel that injustice has been meted out to them, any efforts to appease them will not work.
Explaining why opposition parties are suspicious about the Bill, he cited the example of Uttar Pradesh where “people can’t offer namaz, even on their rooftops”.
John Brittas of CPI(M) said it is an attack on the Constitution.
“It attacks the basic tenets of India’s Constitution, where it is secularism, where it is democracy, and equality. There is a cardinal violation happening. They have already discriminated against people by segregating them. They are now segregating God from God. Hindu God from Allah,” he said.
Y V Subba Reddy of YSRCP too opposed the Bill, saying this is “unconstitutional”.
Congress member Abhishek Singhvi said on one hand, the Bill has omitted the concept of ‘Waqf by User’, at least prospectively, disallowing Waqfs to be created on the basis of uninterrupted usage over a significant period of time.
“On the other, the applicability of the Limitation Act, if this Bill is passed, has inversely and conversely allowed the government, quasi governmental bodies and others outside the community to lay claim over a real Waqf property on the basis of uninterrupted and continued possession beyond 12 years, so long as litigation is not started prior to that,” he added.
A property can thus be usurped under the principle of adverse possession, which means that if the government or any similar entity or other individual from outside the community continues to be in hostile possession of any Waqf property, then the government or that individual can claim title over that Waqf property after the lapse of 12 years, he said.
“This is a deliberate attempt by the government to further its own agenda by minimising protection conferred upon Waqf properties with the right hand and significantly increase its own control and power to permanently claim these properties with its left hand,” Singhvi alleged.
Participating in the discussion, which started at 1300 hours in the House, Muzibulla Khan of BJD said Muslims in this country are tense because a non-Muslim would be kept for the management under this Bill.
DMK leader Tiruchi Siva said his party opposes the Bill as it is legally flawed.
“I stand on the behalf of my party to oppose this Bill… We reject the Bill in its entirety because it is legally flawed, constitutionally indefensible and morally reprehensible,” he stated.
“Why is a certain community being targeted is our question?” Siva asked.
The intention of the government is malafide and deplorable, and the DMK is certain that the Supreme Court will strike the Bill down, Siva said.
AAP member Sanjay Singh stated that the Bill is against the tenets of the Indian Constitution, and alleged that the government wants to control Muslim religious bodies through the legislation.
Singh noted that after Muslims, the government will go after other religious bodies of Sikhs, Christians, Jains, etc and hand them over to their “friends”.
Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut spoke against the Bill and questioned the government’s intent.
“Why is the government so worried about poor Muslims? Even Muhammad Ali Jinnah did not show so much concern for poor Muslims,” Raut said, accusing the NDA of diverting attention from US President Trump’s announcement for 26 per cent tariffs. (PTI)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
