The Indian government’s recent defense of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, before the Supreme Court has drawn comparisons to the Hindu Code Bills of the 1950s, particularly in how both legislative actions aim to reform personal laws and property management within religious communities.
Centre’s Defence of the Waqf Amendment Act
The Centre has asserted that the Waqf Amendment Act is a secular law that regulates the management of waqf properties, focusing on administrative and procedural reforms without interfering with religious practices. It emphasizes that waqf is an Islamic concept but not an essential religious practice, and thus, the law does not infringe upon constitutional protections of religious freedom .
A key aspect of the amendment is the mandatory registration of all waqf properties, including those established by customary usage, known as “waqf by user.” The government contends that this requirement has been in place since 1923 and is necessary to prevent unauthorized claims over private and government lands .
- Advertisement -
Additionally, the inclusion of non-Muslims in waqf boards is presented as a move towards inclusivity and transparency, aiming to reduce corruption and enhance governance .
Historical Parallel with the Hindu Code Bills
The Hindu Code Bills, enacted in the 1950s, were a series of laws aimed at reforming Hindu personal law, including the Hindu Marriage Act, Hindu Succession Act, and others. These reforms sought to modernize Hindu society by codifying laws related to marriage, inheritance, and adoption, thereby promoting gender equality and social justice .
Similar to the Waqf Amendment Act, the Hindu Code Bills faced significant opposition from conservative elements within the Hindu community, who viewed them as state interference in religious matters. However, proponents argued that such reforms were necessary for the progress and modernization of society.
Current Legal Scrutiny and Public Response
The Supreme Court has temporarily stayed certain provisions of the Waqf Amendment Act, including the removal of the “waqf by user” clause and the inclusion of non-Muslims in waqf boards, pending further hearings. The Centre has defended these provisions as necessary for administrative efficiency and to prevent misuse of waqf properties .
Public response has been mixed, with some Muslim organizations and opposition parties expressing concerns that the amendments could undermine Muslim control over waqf properties and infringe upon religious autonomy .
Conclusion
The Centre’s defense of the Waqf Amendment Act, drawing parallels to the Hindu Code Bills, underscores a broader trend of legislative interventions aimed at reforming personal laws and property management within religious communities. While such reforms are intended to promote transparency and prevent misuse, they also raise important questions about the balance between state authority and religious autonomy. The ongoing legal proceedings will determine the extent to which these reforms align with constitutional principles and the rights of religious communities.
