Waqf Amendment Act, 2025: Ensuring Accountability, Not Religious Interference

Deepak Sharma
The recent enactment of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 has stirred political debate, with some quarters alleging that the amendments amount to interference in religious affairs. However, such criticism reflects either a misunderstanding of the constitutional and legal status of waqf institutions or a deliberate attempt to politicize a progressive administrative reform.
To begin with, it is important to understand that waqf is not a religious body but a statutory public trust. Under Muslim law, a waqf is a permanent dedication of property for religious, charitable, or pious purposes. However, its management and supervision are governed by the Waqf Act, 1995, which provides for the constitution of Waqf Boards at both the State and Central levels. These boards are statutory administrative authorities entrusted with secular responsibilities – such as maintaining records, ensuring revenue generation from waqf assets, protecting properties from encroachment, and applying income for the benefit of the community.
Far from being an attack on religious freedom, the amendments seek to ensure better governance, transparency, and accountability in the administration of waqf properties – objectives that align squarely with the Preamble and objectives of the Waqf Act, 1995.
To understand the nature of the amendment, one must begin with the Preamble of the Waqf Act, 1995, which states: “An Act to provide for the better administration of waqf and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”
This leaves no ambiguity: the Act – including its 2025 amendment – is about administration, not theology. Waqf Boards are statutory public authorities, not religious institutions. Their function is the secular management of properties endowed for religious or charitable purposes under Muslim law.
Purpose of the Amendment
Over the past decades, mismanagement and gross misuse of waqf properties have become a chronic issue. There have been several documented instances where waqf land has been illegally transferred, encroached upon, or leased out for paltry sums – often with the tacit or direct involvement of political figures. Investigations in various states have revealed how politicians have used their influence over Waqf Boards to allot valuable waqf land to their associates or shell companies. In some cases, waqf properties were illegally occupied by influential individuals for personal or commercial use under the guise of religious service, depriving the intended beneficiaries – including the poor, orphans, and students – of their rightful support.
In many states, politically aligned individuals have used their influence to secure control over waqf properties under the garb of religious service, thereby defeating the very purpose of the waqf. This erosion of accountability has not only resulted in financial loss running into thousands of crores but has also denied poor Muslims access to education, health, and welfare schemes originally envisioned under waqf deeds.
Such systematic exploitation highlights the urgent need for structural reform. The 2025 Amendment addresses this precisely by introducing measures such as fixed tenures for Waqf Board members, mandatory digital inventories, independent audits, and enhanced legal powers to reclaim encroached land. These are tools of good governance – not religious encroachment – designed to restore public trust and ensure that waqf properties serve their original charitable purpose.
Key Provisions of the Amendment
Some of the most impactful provisions include:

1. Digitization of Waqf Records: All Waqf Boards must maintain a centralized, digitized inventory of waqf properties. This promotes transparency and prevents record tampering.
2. Mandatory Audits: Independent audits by empaneled Chartered Accountants must be conducted annually, with audit reports made publicly available.
3. Time-Bound Inquiries: Allegations of misconduct against mutawallis or board members must be investigated within a specified time.
4. Appeals to High Courts: Decisions of Waqf Tribunals can now be challenged before High Courts, thus restoring judicial oversight.
5. Inclusion of Non-Muslim Members (for administrative purposes): This provision has no bearing on religious practices or theological matters.
6. Encroachment Eviction Tribunals: Dedicated forums have been empowered to evict encroachers from waqf lands swiftly.
7. Grievance Portal for Beneficiaries: A public-facing platform allows students, widows, and others to raise complaints if denied waqf services.
   These reforms are designed to empower beneficiaries, reclaim encroached land, eliminate political interference, and restore public trust in waqf institutions.
   Addressing the Allegation of Discrimination
   It is important to note that these reforms do not impose any special or targeted restrictions on the Muslim community. The Waqf Amendment merely brings the governance of waqf properties in line with the broader legal framework applicable to all religious and charitable endowments in India. It does not single out or impose any undue burden on Muslim institutions.
   Secular Regulation of Religious Property: A Constitutional Mandate
   The Constitution of India draws a clear line between religious practice and the secular administration of property. Article 26 of the Constitution guarantees every religious denomination the right to manage its own affairs in matters of religion, but it does not grant absolute autonomy in secular matters such as finances, property, or administrative appointments.
   This distinction has been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in:
   Azeez Basha v. Union of India (1968) – held that statutory bodies can be regulated without violating Article 26.
   Board of Muslim Wakfs v. Radha Kishan (1979) – ruled that the State has the right to regulate waqf properties, which are essentially public charitable trusts.
   T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) – drew a sharp line between religious freedom and the administration of secular assets.
   The inclusion of non-Muslim members, a much-debated provision, is confined to administrative participation only . It neither touches theological issues nor interferes with Islamic law governing waqf creation or usage. It is akin to including external professionals (auditors, civil servants, judges) in the boards of temples or churches to improve governance.
   Role of Vested Interests and Political Narratives
   The opposition to the amendment has been fuelled largely by those who benefited from the lack of accountability – political middlemen, encroachers, and mismanaging officials. Their claim that the Act interferes with Islam is not only misleading but strategically framed to obstruct reform. These vested interests attempt to shield themselves behind communal rhetoric while waqf beneficiaries – the poor, orphans, students, and widows – continue to suffer.
   It is worth noting that the Act has no impact on religious practices, rituals, mosque governance, or personal law. It only targets the administrative infrastructure that manages the assets of the community in trust.
   Reform, Not Repression
   The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 is a well-calibrated, constitutionally sound reform to bring waqf governance at par with the administration of other religious endowments. It is not a communal or discriminatory law, but a secular governance framework that ensures that community assets are managed in the public interest.
   The Preamble of the original Act – aimed at “better administration” – remains the guiding principle. The Boards are not religious authorities; they are administrative trustees of public charity. The reforms neither alter waqf’s spiritual essence nor infringe upon religious rights.
   It is time the narrative shifts from fear to fact, from resistance to responsibility. The Muslim community, like others, deserves institutions that are transparent, efficient, and accountable. Reform is not persecution; it is protection.
   Let us, therefore, support this progressive step and ensure that the waqf system continues to serve its true purpose – public good and community upliftment, with integrity and trust.
   (The writer is Advocate J&K High Court and Convener, Research and Advocacy Group (RAAG)