NEW DELHI: Parliament approved the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 early Friday, following the Rajya Sabha’s endorsement of the controversial legislation after a debate lasting over 13 hours.
During the discussion, opposition parties strongly objected to the Bill, labelling it as anti-Muslim and unconstitutional. In response, the government argued that this historic reform would benefit the minority community.
The Bill received approval in the Rajya Sabha with 128 members voting in favor and 95 opposing it. It was also passed in the Lok Sabha early Thursday, with 288 members supporting it and 232 against it.
Additionally, Parliament approved the Mussalman Wakf (Repeal) Bill, 2025, with the Rajya Sabha’s approval, following the Lok Sabha’s endorsement.
Union Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju, participating in the debate, accused the Congress and other opposition parties of instilling fear in the Muslim community regarding the Bill. He emphasized that the central government’s focus is on inclusive development for all, as reflected in the motto of “Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas.”
Rijiju highlighted that the Waqf Board is a statutory body and, like all government bodies, should be secular. He argued that having a few non-Muslims on the Waqf Board would not influence its decisions negatively but rather add value.
The minister also noted that the government incorporated several suggestions from the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) and stakeholders into the Bill.
Opposition parties, under the INDIA bloc, opposed the Bill, claiming it was unconstitutional and intended to target Muslims. They alleged that the legislation aimed to seize Muslim properties and transfer them to corporations.
Leaders from various opposition parties, including the Congress, TMC, DMK, AAP, Shiv Sena (UBT), Samajwadi Party, RJD, and Left parties, have accused the government of bringing the Bill with malicious intent. Some have even called for the Bill to be withdrawn.
During the discussion, Leader of the House and BJP leader J P Nadda defended the Bill, stating that it is not aimed at targeting Muslims but rather at assisting the underprivileged and safeguarding the rights of Muslim women. Nadda went on to criticize the Congress for allegedly marginalizing Muslim women during their time in power.
Nadda emphasized the importance of bringing Muslim women into the mainstream, highlighting that other Muslim-majority countries had already banned triple talaq years ago. He expressed his support for the Waqf Bill, emphasizing its goal of reforming the management of Waqf properties.
Rijiju, another government official, stressed the secular nature of the Waqf Board and clarified that the inclusion of non-Muslims on the Board was limited to four out of 22 members. He accused the Congress and other opposition parties of neglecting the welfare of Muslims during their decades in power.
In response, Leader of Opposition Mallikarjun Kharge accused the government of inciting conflict by oppressing Muslims through the Bill. He urged the ruling party to prioritize peace and harmony in the country over divisive policies.
Kharge, who is also the President of the Congress party, strongly criticized the legislation, stating that it is unconstitutional and detrimental to Indian Muslims. He called on the government to retract the Bill, highlighting numerous flaws within it and advising against turning it into a matter of pride.
He further accused the NDA government of deliberately causing distress to Muslims, alleging that the Bill aims to undermine the community by seizing their properties.
During the debate, Congress MP Syed Naseer Hussain echoed Kharge’s sentiments, denouncing the proposed legislation as unconstitutional and claiming that it unfairly targets Muslims. He also accused the BJP of exploiting the Bill to incite communal tensions and division in society for political gain, asserting that it relegates Muslims to second-class citizenship.
Manoj Jha of the RJD expressed concerns about the Bill’s implications, questioning the government’s motives and suggesting that the Bill be referred to the Parliament’s select committee for further review. He criticized the Bill as a form of divisive politics aimed at marginalizing Muslims from mainstream society.
Samajwadi Party MP Ram Gopal Yadav emphasized the importance of respecting all religions and warned against India veering towards authoritarianism. He stressed the need to address the grievances of minorities, particularly Muslims, to prevent further alienation and unrest.
John Brittas of the CPI(M) condemned the Bill as an assault on the Constitution, undermining its core principles of secularism, democracy, and equality. He criticized the government for discriminating against individuals based on religion and urged against further segregation and division in the name of religion.
Y V Subba Reddy of the YSRCP also opposed the Bill, stating that it is unconstitutional. Congress member Abhishek Singhvi expressed concerns that the Bill excludes the concept of Waqf by user, preventing the creation of Waqfs based on uninterrupted usage over a significant period. Singhvi accused the government of attempting to advance its own agenda by reducing protection for Waqf properties with one hand while increasing its control and power to claim these properties permanently with the other.
Independent MP Kapil Sibal pointed out that non-Muslims were previously allowed to form the Waqf Board, but the new Bill prohibits this. He called for reforms in Hindu religion and questioned why only one community was being singled out. Sibal urged the government to pass a law ensuring women have rights to inherit property, specifically calling for laws to protect the rights of daughters.
BJD’s Muzibulla Khan expressed Muslim concerns over the inclusion of non-Muslims on the Waqf Board, while party leader Sasmit Patra clarified that BJD MPs were not bound by a party whip and could vote freely. DMK leader Tiruchi Siva stated his party’s opposition to the Bill due to legal flaws and questioned why a specific community was being targeted.
Siva firmly rejected the Bill, calling it legally flawed, constitutionally indefensible, and morally reprehensible. He criticized the government’s intentions as malicious and condemned the legislation. Siva expressed confidence that the Supreme Court would overturn the Bill. AAP member Sanjay Singh echoed these sentiments, arguing that the Bill contradicts the principles of the Indian Constitution and accusing the government of attempting to control Muslim religious bodies through the legislation.
Singh pointed out that following Muslims, the government will likely target other religious groups such as Sikhs, Christians, and Jains, and potentially hand them over to their allies.
Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut criticized the Bill and questioned the government’s motives.
“Why is the government showing such concern for poor Muslims?” Raut asked, accusing the NDA of trying to divert attention from US President Donald Trump’s recent announcement of reciprocal tariffs on India.
