5 Issues in New Waqf Law: What is the legal impact of the new Waqf Bill?

The Five Most Controversial Problems in Waqf Governance in India

Management of waqf properties in India has been a subject of much controversy and dispute for a long period of time. Waqf, or the Islamic charitable and religious purpose endowment, plays an extreme role in funding mosques, madrasas, and social welfare institutions. 

However, different administrative problems, cases in the courts, allegations of corruption, and government interventions have plagued the management of waqf properties. With the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, controversies have only mounted to the extent that some see the reforms as a necessity for transparency, while others fear overreach by the government and encroachment upon community control.

Despite legal structures established by the Waqf Act, 1995, and amendments thereto, issues of encroachment, mismanagement, political interference, legal complications, and lack of transparency persist to taint the smooth functioning of waqf boards. In this article, five of the most contentious problems of waqf administration in India are debated, highlighting their implication and legalities involved.

1. Encroachment and Illegal Holding of Waqf Properties
The most nagging problem regarding waqf administration is the encroachment of waqf properties by private parties, corporations, and even government offices. Waqf properties, intended to cater to the religious and social welfare aspirations of the Muslim community, have often been the victims of unlawful land grabbing and unauthorized buildings. The reports point out that thousands of acres of waqf land in India are already under encroachment, and the local authorities are not taking stern action.

Though anti-encroachment laws are present under the Waqf Act, enforcement is weak due to bureaucratic inefficiencies, interference of politicians, and loopholes within the law. Litigation regarding ownership of waqf lands has mostly resulted in drawn-out cases, thereby thwarting the efficient utilization of such properties. The amendments to the 2025 Waqf Act propose stringent penalties and faster eviction processes for encroachers.
Nonetheless, critics claim that without institutional reforms, such as improved management of land records and involvement of the community, waqf lands will continue to be prone to illegal occupation and exploitation.

2. Waqf Board Corruption and Financial Mismanagement
State and Central Waqf Board management of waqf property and funds has been plagued with corruption charges, financial misappropriation, and unaccountability for a very long time. Various audits revealed missing documents, illegal sale of land, instances of waqf property let out at token rates, etc., and posed serious questions on the integrity of waqf administration.

One of the largest financial issues is the misappropriation of waqf funds, which are intended for charitable purposes, educational programs, and religious organizations. Rather, reports show that in most instances, the funds have been embezzled or diverted to uses that do not serve the community.

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, adds the conduct of compulsory financial audits, independent monitoring, and online monitoring of waqf assets to improve accountability and transparency. It further suggests setting up a centralized digital registry of waqf properties to make financial transactions and landholdings more transparent. Nevertheless, some leaders in the communities are concerned that such steps might result in undue government control, undermining the independence of waqf institutions in conducting their own affairs.

3. Political Interference and Waqf Autonomy Erosion
Even though waqf boards are legally an autonomous entity, in many instances, these boards are given much political interference in their management. In most states, the political considerations have an influence on waqf board members' appointments, resulting in a biased judgment, nepotism, and even political manipulation of waqf properties for an electoral advantage.

The 2025 amendments have generated fear of growing government control over waqf management, especially by bringing in a system of nomination for waqf board members rather than elections. Although the government says this will bring efficiency and competent leadership, opposition interprets this as an effort to centralize control over waqf institutions.

Political interference has also caused disputes regarding waqf properties, as state governments have taken over waqf lands for infrastructure development, frequently without proper compensation. This has put community leaders and the government at odds, with calls for more legal safeguards to stop the arbitrary seizure of waqf properties.

4. Legal Ambiguities and Conflicting Land Claims
The legal infrastructure for waqf properties is convoluted and frequently in conflict, producing lengthy battles of ownership and usage rights. Waqf properties are safeguarded by the Waqf Act, but also come under ordinary land acquisition regulations, municipal legislations, and state government policy, resulting in overlapping jurisdictions and legal ambiguities.

A number of cases have brought to the fore conflicting claims over waqf land, with private parties, government departments, and even religious bodies challenging ownership. The lack of a uniform legal procedure to resolve such disputes in an effective manner has resulted in protracted litigation, making it difficult to ensure that waqf properties are put to their religious and charitable ends.

To solve this issue, the recent bill, gives greater authority to Waqf Tribunals, which can pass final judgments on the cases concerning the properties without any decision of the civil courts being overruled.

While this is regarded as a step in the right direction toward the facile adjudication of disputes relating to legal matters, one cannot yet offer any observations about how well the waqf tribunals will perform on the ground, particularly with the burden legacy of waqf cases within the judicial apparatus.

5. Lack of Transparency and Public Accountability
The lack of openness in financial transactions, land records, and decision-making is one of the main issues facing waqf management. The absence of a centralised database for waqf properties has historically led to arbitrary leasing of waqf assets, illicit sales, and fraudulent transactions.

To counter this, the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, recommends the full digitalisation of waqf records so that all transactions are available to the public through an online portal. Further, it investigates the application of blockchain technology for ensuring no tampering or unauthorised alteration of land records.

But while digitalisation is a step in the right direction, it also raises questions about who will manage access to these records and whether representatives of the community will be provided with a stake in the management of waqf administration. Some analysts believe that simply digitising records will not suffice unless accompanied by more robust legal safeguards and community involvement to ensure that waqf management is kept free from outside exploitation and mismanagement.

Conclusion

The administration of waqf properties in India continues to be a subject of intense legal and political debate. While the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, introduces several measures to enhance transparency, efficiency, and legal clarity, it also raises concerns about potential overreach by the state, erosion of waqf autonomy, and inadequate community representation in decision-making.

The resolution of these contentious issues requires a balanced approach that prioritizes legal reforms, strict anti-corruption measures, and mechanisms to prevent political interference. Additionally, strengthening community participation in waqf governance is crucial to ensuring that waqf assets are managed responsibly and utilized for the benefit of society.

Unless structural and inclusive reforms are implemented, waqf properties will remain entangled in disputes, corruption, and mismanagement, preventing them from fulfilling their core purpose of serving religious, educational, and social welfare objectives.