Waqf Bill Sparks Legal Battle After Lok Sabha Passage
Waqf Bill: From Parliament to Supreme Court, the Next Frontier
On April 2, 2025, the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024, sailed through the Lok Sabha amidst fierce opposition, securing 288 votes in favour against 232 opposed after a contentious 12-hour debate that stretched into the early hours of April 3.
The ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA), led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), leveraged its coalition strength to push the bill forward, despite vocal protests from the INDIA bloc. The bill is under discussion in the Rajya Sabha, where the NDA holds 125 of 245 seats, needing just 119 for a majority with 9 vacancies. Given this edge, passage seems imminent unless unexpected defections occur. But the fight is far from over—what is the opposition to this bill? What controversial provisions have ignited such resistance? Who might take this to the Supreme Court, and what arguments could they wield against it?
Understanding the Waqf Bill and Its Key Provisions
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024, now titled the "Unified Waqf Management Empowerment Efficiency and Development (UMEED) Bill," amends the Waqf Act, 1995, which governs the 9.4 lakh acres of Waqf properties in India—land dedicated in perpetuity for Islamic charitable purposes.
Key provisions include mandatory registration of Waqf properties with district collectors within six months, digitisation of records, inclusion of Muslim women and non-Muslims on Waqf boards, abolition of "Waqf by user" (recognition via long-term use), and shifting dispute resolution from Waqf tribunals to state officials, with appeals to high courts. It also empowers the government to reclaim properties it deems its own, overriding Waqf claims, aiming to overhaul a system managing assets worth ₹1.2 lakh crore but yielding only ₹2 billion annually.
BJP’s Claim: Waqf Bill a Step Toward Progress
The BJP has positioned the bill as a transformative reform for India’s Muslim community. Union Minister Kiren Rijiju, introducing it in the Lok Sabha, argued it addresses decades of mismanagement without touching religious practices. Home Minister Amit Shah echoed this on April 2, asserting it ensures Waqf properties serve their charitable intent, not private or governmental interests.
The party highlights several benefits: Transparency and accountability via digitisation and audits, tackling corruption that sees 58,889 of 8.7 lakh Waqf properties encroached upon. Empowerment of marginalised groups is promised through mandatory representation of women and diverse Muslim sects on boards, amplifying voices often sidelined. Streamlined governance shifts oversight to district collectors, aiming to resolve disputes faster than the overburdened Waqf tribunals. Finally, Economic Benefits could unlock the ₹120 billion potential (per the 2006 Sachar Committee) of these assets, uplifting poor Muslims through better-managed revenue.
Opposition’s Alarm: Waqf Bill a Threat to Muslim Identity
The INDIA bloc and Muslim groups see the bill as a sinister overreach. Congress Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, on April 3, called it a “brazen assault on the Constitution,” while AIMIM’s Asaduddin Owaisi tore a copy in protest during the Lok Sabha debate.
The opposition to the Waqf bill is on many counts. The detractors decry a perceived attack on religious autonomy, arguing that non-Muslim board members and state control via collectors violate Muslims’ right to manage their religious institutions. Constitutional concerns arise from potential breaches of equality and religious freedom, with critics like SP’s Zia ur Rahman Barq labeling it discriminatory.
Many opposition leaders have questioned why target Waqf alone when Hindu endowments face no such scrutiny? The risk of misuse also worries opponents, who fear state officials could reclassify Waqf land as government property, especially in BJP-ruled states like Uttar Pradesh, where 78% of Waqf claims are already contested.
From Parliament to Supreme Court: The Next Frontier
With the Lok Sabha hurdle cleared, and the Rajya Sabha passage looking imminent, the battle now shifts to the judiciary. Several entities have vowed to challenge the bill in the Supreme Court if it clears the Rajya Sabha. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has pledged legal action. Tamil Nadu’s DMK, led by CM M.K. Stalin confirmed that it would file a case, protesting the bill’s passage with black badges in the state assembly. The Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), via Kerala president Sayyid Sadiq Ali Shihab Thangal, also committed to a court challenge calling it a fabricated law to seize Waqf assets.
Potential Supreme Court Arguments: Constitutional Grounds
Opponents are likely to invoke constitutional provisions to contest the Waqf bill. They could argue a violation of religious freedom under Articles 25 and 26, which guarantee the right to practice religion and manage religious affairs. The inclusion of non-Muslims on Waqf boards and state oversight might be seen as undue interference, clashing with precedents like the 1954 Shirur Mutt case.
Another argument could center on equality before the law (Article 14), asserting that targeting Waqf properties—while sparing Hindu endowments—lacks a rational basis, potentially failing the reasonable classification test from the 1952 Anwar Ali Sarkar case. Property Rights under Article 300A could be raised, with the abolition of “Waqf by user” and state reclamation powers risking arbitrary deprivation, against the 2011 K.T. Plantation ruling’s due process requirement.
Federalism Under Scrutiny
The Waqf bill’s push to centralise control over Waqf properties could face a challenge based on how India splits power between the central government and the states. Land is something states usually handle under the Constitution’s rules, but the Waqf Bill puts district collectors—officials tied to the central government—in charge and stops states from making their own decisions about Waqf.
This could remind people of a famous 1994 Supreme Court case, S.R. Bommai, where the court stepped in to stop the central government from overreaching into state matters. Critics might argue the bill messes up the balance of power that India’s system is built on.
International Law Perspective: A Global Lens
Opponents might also look to global human rights rules to back up their fight. They could point to the right to religious freedom, found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 18) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 18), saying that the government’s tight grip on Waqf properties goes too far and stops Muslims from running their own religious trusts—something UN human rights experts have said people should be free to do.
They might also bring up fairness under the law (UDHR Article 7 and ICCPR Article 26), arguing that the bill unfairly singles out Muslim properties while leaving others alone, which goes against UN rules against treating people differently.
Moreover, they could say the government grabbing Waqf land breaks property rights (UDHR Article 17 and hinted at in the ICCPR), calling it unfair. Additionally, they might argue that moving decisions from special Waqf courts to government officials messes with the right to a fair process (UDHR Article 10 and ICCPR Article 14), since UN guidelines say decisions should be made by neutral judges, not officials who might favour one side.
A Protracted Legal Saga Ahead
The journey of the Waqf Bill and the controversy that surrounds it is far from over. If it clears the Rajya Sabha, a long-drawn legal process awaits. The Supreme Court will weigh constitutional rights, federal balance, and international norms, with outcomes ranging from striking down specific provisions to imposing safeguards. All eyes will soon shift from Parliament’s heated debates to the judiciary’s measured halls, where the future of India’s 9.4 lakh acres of Waqf land will face a defining test.
News