New Delhi: For the second consecutive day, parliament functioned well beyond midnight as The Waqf Amendment Bill, 2025 was passed by the Rajya Sabha at about 2.35 am with 128 votes in favour and 95 against the legislation. The margin was narrower in the upper house in comparison to the Lok Sabha in which the bill was passed on April 3 at about 2 am ith 288 votes in favour and 232 against the legislation.
On Thursday (April 3), several opposition members wore black to parliament in protest against the bill. While BJP allies including the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) and Janata Dal (United) supported the legislation in the Rajya Sabha like in the Lok Sabha, chinks in the opposition emerged after the BJD spoke against the bill but also said that it has not issued a whip and its 7 MPs are free to vote according to their conscience.
The YSRCP too, spoke against the legislation but did not issue a whip to its members.
While the discussion in the Lok Sabha did not see any interruptions, the Rajya Sabha saw a series of disruptions with the Treasury benches and the opposition crossing swords in the course of the debate. Opposition members criticised the legislation for reducing Muslims to “second class citizens”, calling the bill itself an “encroachment on minority rights” and a means for land grab while accusing the government of using communal polarisation as a tool of deflection.
The Treasury benches said that the bill would bring in transparency in the administration of Waqf bodies and properties.
In his reply at the close of the debate, Union minister for minority affairs Kiren Rijiju said that the bill has nothing to do with religion but deals with administration of property.
“It has been said here that Muslims will be harmed by the step we are taking. Many people said this is unconstitutional, illegal and the right of Muslims is being snatched away. Very categorically, I want to reject all these allegations,” he said.
‘Communal polarisation’
Congress MP Syed Naseer Hussain who opened the debate said that the present legislation is being brought despite the BJP supporting the 1995 Waqf Act and supporting amendments to it in 2013.
“Why did you support it and pass it with consensus? After 2013 they formed the government in 2014 but till 2024 they did not understand that this is a draconian law and appeases a certain community. They remembered this in 2024 because after giving a call of 400 seats (in the Lok Sabha elections) they were reduced to 240,” said Hussain.
“They could not understand how to bring back their vote bank. That is why they have brought this bill. By bringing this bill you are doing communal polarisation and you are saying we are appeasing? Everyone knows who polarises and who does politics over religion and villianises a particular community. This bill is based on total falsity, and a misinformation campaign has been built in the last 6 months. BJP’s fake factory is involved in spreading misinformation,” he added.
People from the Muslim community stage a protest against the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, at Mominpura area, in Nagpur, Maharashtra, Thursday, April 3, 2025. Photo: PTI
The Bill renames the 1995 Waqf Act – it is now the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act (UMEED) – and seeks to enhance the efficiency of the administration and management of Waqf properties. It has faced criticism for seeking to change the composition of the Central Waqf Council and the state Waqf boards.
It seeks to ensure the representation of Muslim women and include non-Muslims. It also provides for the establishment of a separate ‘Board of Auqaf’ for Bohras and Aghakhanis. The Bill crucially omits Section 40, which relates to the powers of Waqf boards to decide if a property is Waqf property.
‘Why bring this amendment?’
The debate saw opposition independent MP Kapil Sibal crossing swords with union ministers Nirmala Sitharaman and Kiren Rijiju after he questioned the bill for providing that only Muslims can donate property as Waqf.
“The property is mine, I am the owner, I want to give it to charity. Who are you to say I cannot? I can give even as a Hindu. Why have you kept this provision? If you want one nation, one law then this should be enforced on other religions as well,” he said.
Treasury benches rose in protest when Sibal said there are 32 waqf boards with about 8 lakh acres of waqf properties but the total area of Hindu religious institutions in Tamil Nadu Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Karnataka is about 10 lakh acres in only four states.
Also Read: ‘Vote Bank Politics’ Versus ‘Disenfranchisement’ As Waqf Bill Passes Lok Sabha
Rijiju interjected during Sibal’s speech and said that senior members often make allegations in their speech and leave so he has no option but to interject and clear the “confusion”.
“Waqf property is civil but he is comparing it with religious property in four states. He is saying that if property is his how can anyone else decide whether it can be run by a non-Muslim. Will we have a different ministry for Muslims?” said Rijiju.
Union finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman then rose and said that in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu and Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam, government appointees monitor it.
“What I said was that the temples are being managed by the government and so is waqf. The statutory appointees are all by government. Why did you have to bring this amendment then?” said Sibal.
Addressing Rijiju, Sibal said that there is a difference between an auqaf and trust.
“In auqaf the land that was donated it belongs to God. It does not belong to the Trust. You cannot sell it ever unlike a Trust. Waqf property can be donated for religious purposes,” he said as vice president and Rajya Sabha chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar asked him to conclude his speech.
Budget cuts and lack of educational, economic empowerment
Opposition members said that while the government is promising to bring transparency, the budget allocations to the ministry of minority affairs have been left unutilised.
Hussain asked why the Central Waqf Council did not get the budget allocated to it and why several state governments have not formed waqf boards. Leader of opposition and Congress MP Mallikarjun Kharge also raised the reductions and non utilisation of funds in the ministry of minority affairs budgets in the last five years.
“On one hand you are cutting the budget and on the other hand you are not utilising the funds. This shows that you are not ready to educationally and economically empower minorities. Five minority schemes were closed down including Maulana Azad Scholarship, Free Coaching, Support for students and schemes for providing education in Madrasas. You are stopping these schemes and you are saying that you are working for minorities and women,” said Kharge.
‘Will you put CCTV cameras in homes and mosques?’
Opposition members also raised the clause in the legislation defining “Waqf” as waqf or endowment by any person practicing Islam for at least five years and having ownership of such property.
“Earlier PM used to say that we can recognise them by their clothes,” said Hussain.
“Now how will we demonstrate? What clothes shall I wear? Should I wear a cap or keep a beard? Or will someone put a CCTV camera in my house to see whether I’m reading the namaz or not? Will there be CCTV cameras in mosques? Will there be a department to determine who is a Muslim?”
RJD MP Manoj Jha said that as the bill seeks to include non-Muslims, the spirit of secularism should be extended to other religions as well.
“I will stand in praise if you spread this spirit of secularism in this country that in every religious institution other religions are included whether it is Sikh, Muslim, Christians. Or have you decided that all the cooperation will be through Muslims only?” he said.
“Is this bill a legal cover for bulldozers? That scares me as a citizen of this country. Muslims living in cities-ghetto, if they go to villages they are called infiltrators. And their organisations are opaque and suspect. A tone of conspiracy is used. Using dog whistle politics to exclude people is not right,” he added.
In his reply Rijiju said that the number of non-Muslims had been limited in both the Central Waqf Council and state boards.
“There will be no interference in any religious matters. Among the 22 members (in Central Waqf Council) four non-Muslims can only give their opinion they cannot be the majority,” he said.
CPI(M) MP John Brittas referred to the omission of Section 107 of the 1995 law that had made the Limitation Act, 1963 inapplicable to Waqf properties and said that the legislation now proposes to discriminate between different gods.
“They are segregating Gods from Gods. This Act of limitation is not applicable to a Hindu God like Devasthanam. But they want to make it applicable to Allah,” he said.
“How can they discriminate between Gods? Hitherto they were discriminating between people now they are discriminating among Gods.
The Limitation Act is a statutory bar on filing cases after a period of time, with opposition members saying that it will allow those who have unlawfully possessed Waqf property for more than 12 years to claim its title.
Land grab in the garb of bill
Opposition MPs also accused the government of using the bill to grab waqf lands and give it to big businesses.
“You have called this bill UMEED but a large population of this country is without hope because you are looting their land to sell it to big businesses. I appeal to you to withdraw this bill,” said Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi.
NCP MP Fauzia Khan said that if the bill was indeed meant to reform waqf boards, then it would have stringent changes for encroachment and reform the survey process.
“It is like saying let us take ownership of your house because you are finding it difficult to run it,” she said.
The Bill had earlier provided that if there is a question as to whether a property belongs to the government, it will be referred to the collector who will have the jurisdiction to determine “whether such property is a government property or not and submit his report to the state government”.
On the recommendation of the joint parliamentary committee, however, this has been changed to an officer above the level of a district collector.
“The biggest encroacher of waqf properties is the state government itself. Resources of the survey commissioners should have been increased instead of giving more powers to the government to control these properties. This bill itself is an encroachment on minority rights and constitutional rights from Article 14 to 30. Today it is Muslims tomorrow it will be Sikhs and Buddhists and Christians.”
BJP’s lone Muslim MP
AAP MP Sanjay Singh said that while the government says it is bringing the legislation to empower Muslims, the party does not have a single Muslim MP in Lok Sabha and only one in Rajya Sabha.
“The government says we are bringing this law for the benefit of Muslims but you don’t have Muslim MPs except one, Ghulam Ali. You finished the politics of Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi and Shahnawaz Husain. Are you benefiting Muslims?” he said.
Ghulam Ali, a nominated member from Jammu and Kashmir, was the only Muslim BJP MP who spoke on the legislation towards the end of the debate close to midnight.
“You have brought sections in the Waqf act that have defamed Muslims in the form of a conspiracy,” he said while supporting the bill.
